On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 12:06:47AM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote: > ScruLoose wrote: > > >As others have noted, virus traffic is not actually the same as > >spam-traffic, and you might want a particular tool for each job... <SNIP> > Back on topic, I agree that it is important to realize that different > tools may be more effective against different forms of Spam. Which is really all I was getting at. They're both equally unwelcome, and as I mentioned, I personally let spamassassin regard it all as spam. It may not be the most technically perfect way, but it seems to work well enough for me. > P.S. Is the +debuser working to help you avoid Spam? Interesting you should mention that, actually. I had a filter set up for a while so any non-debian-user message that came to that address was dumped into the spam folder. After a few months, this had caught several off-list replies, and there wasn't actually any spam coming to the address. So when I installed SA (recently) I dropped that filter. Now, however, I'm noticing that *all* of the swen traffic I'm receiving is to the +debuser address, so I'm wondering about switching to a different suffix and /dev/null-ing mail addressed to the old one. Basically a variation on the disposable-address trick. Or I could take the plunge and switch to an address on my own domain, on my own mailserver. (The current one is hosted by my ISP.) But if I do that, I'll be all tempted to upgrade to exim4 with the funky integration with SA to do SMTP-rejects for mail that fails SA's scan... And school requires too much of my time to be getting into a project like that right now. Cheers! -- ,-------------------------------------------------------------------------. > -ScruLoose- | < > Please do not | Bwahahaha-- I mean, oops. < > reply off-list. | < `-------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Attachment:
pgpoEWF5lU5AI.pgp
Description: PGP signature