|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] while we're talking about spam, a novel idea
|
This is a good point. I often find my lowest MX is delivering a great deal
of spam. I never put two and two together as I often wondered why my
lowest MX was delivering mail to me. My main server is never down. Now I
know. However for the method I am currently using - total rejection - it
does not much matter but for those who want a less radical approach it
would be worth a try.
I also have read that those who report spam abuse regularly often get less
spam. Apparently the spammers have figured out that NOT sending mail to
the (relatively small) list of complainers takes the heat off somewhat.
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, sean finney wrote:
> so, i have this idea in my head that involves creating a tertiary (or
> whateverenary) mta with even higher mx value. this server would only
> return status 452 errors on every connection attempt.
>
> my guess is that over time, the bulk of the spammers out there would
> shift to trying to send mail through this server. folks who for some
> reason ended up accidentally talking to the mta would get a greylist-like
> temporary error, while spammers would probably forget and move on,
> or at best repeatedly get the same temporary error.
>
> ideas, comments?
>
> sean
>
****************************
* Doug Crompton *
* Richboro, PA 18954 *
* 215-431-6307 *
* *
* doug@crompton.com *
* http://www.crompton.com *
****************************
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|