[Volunteers] spam Re: spam from volunteer list
alvin at Mail.Linux-Consulting.com
Fri Apr 21 01:46:09 PDT 2006
hi ya rick
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Rick Moen wrote:
> SA is _not_ a primary defence in this architecture; mostly a fallback.
> The heavy lifting is done by Exim4 ACLs maintained by J.C. Boggis in his
> EximConfig package (that match many common spam patterns, optionally
> consult RBLs, optionally check SPF, etc.), and invocations of Exim4's
> callout interface (e.g., verifying during incoming SMTP sessions that
> the delivering IP accepts DSNs and mail to postmaster@ and abuse@, as
> mandated by RFCs). Marc Merlin's SA-Exim (a modification of Exim's
> localscan code) only _then_ runs the arriving bitstream through SA for
> spamicity testing, if it survived the earlier Exim ACLs.
> The callout and SPF checks block a very high percentage; others, less,
> but with the end result being very good, indeed.
> The point is that all of this is done _while the SMTP session is open_,
yes... a good thing ...
> so the system can say "55x reject" and not accept it at all. SMTP-time
> checking is not only much, much more effective -- you have more reliable
> and timely information -- but also you can say "no" immediately and
> never risk generating backscatter spam "bounces" to forged senders.
> E.g., Joe-jobs no longer succeed.
for me... that's a problem for the autoresponders at info at wherever ...
> It's funny: I describe an Exim4/EximConfig/SA-Exim/SA setup, and
> somebody inevitably comments "I don't like SpamAssassin" without bothering
> to understand what I was talking about. Still, one tries. ;->
that would be me :-) .. not liking SA ..
> > i can gurantee 100% that xxx is spam if its discarded as such
> > and no more spam will come from that source/sender
> Objective of the above is to 55x-reject _at SMTP time_, and not discard.
yup.. a good thing to do .. wish i have the time to go learn new tricks
i gave up on exim from the days of exim-3, exim-4
too messy to play with its gazillion config options vs 5min to install
a clean sendmail that works in 5 minutes with rbls .. but rbls
are getting less and less effective as days goes on and spammers
> Not even remotely feasible in this deployment, sorry.
> Anyway, I hope you're talking past me for Paul and Micah's benefit,
i usually post everything for all to see unless it's meant and
intended to stay offline
keep up the good work rick... i tend to ask lots o dumb questions to
stir the pot, hopefully for the better :-)
More information about the volunteers