Re: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter)

[Bernd Petrovitsch]

On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 22:54 -0700, jdow wrote:
> From: "Horst von Brand" <vonbrand@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > jdow <jdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> >> Greylist those who have not subscribed.
[...]
> >>                                         Let their email server try
> >> again in 30 minutes. For those who are not subscribed it should not
> >> matter if their message is delayed 30 minutes. And so far spammers
> >> never try again.
> > 
> > Wrong. Greylisting does stop an immense amount of spam here, but a lot
> > comes through.

On one low traffic domain, we perceived 50% less spam with greylisting.
But spam is rising.

> So if it's not perfect it's not worth doing at all, eh? Yet you think

It works now but the next generation viruses/trojans/.... will have real
MTA functionality (i.e. SMTP 100% correct) and it is not a problem since
the zombie nets are large enough that that won't hurt anyone really.

> SPF, which is FAR less suited as a spam preventative, is a single

No means alone will kill spam (except making email as such as expensive
as snail mail). So comparing different means makes no sense.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/