Your rules have an SPF record like this
"v=spf1 mx ptr ip4:24.207.1.0/24 ?all"
that is encouraging a default "accept from all"
for your user
addresses when used as spam "from" addresses.
-all is encouraged and may reduce any backscatter you
receive.
Unfortunately you have to educate all your users on how to
authenticate to your SMTP which could then even sign the
mail with
Domainkeys such as done by Paypal (on of the biggest
spam/phishing
victims). Surgemail lets some of us do this to our servers
thankfully.
I even filed to get on a whitelist service (list.dnswl.org)
that
Surgemail also supports. I agree that everyone can have
their own
choice of rules and perhaps Netwin will add an option to
prevent your
users from misconfiguring the C/R parameters.
Steve Hume
On 24-Apr-08, at 12:56 PM, Matt wrote:
> Your server, your rules.
>
> In my experience, admins who make use of C/R tend to
get very
> emotional, very quickly when they find their servers
blocked for
> pushing their spam problem on others.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
>
>
> webmaster 1usa.com wrote:
>> There is no place in business for emotion.
>> "rude" is an emotion.
>> Most emotional responses are assumptional and
usually a wrong answer.
>> If confused, refer to line #1.
>> ...
>> Each of us here use various software for a
(business) purpose.
>> It is the goal of the publisher to provide various
features in
>> order to attract a wider user base.
>> Likewise, it is important to "finish the
job" and protect the
>> participants.
>> If you want to talk about lack of controls or
"rude", take a look
>> at MySpace for instance.... It could be nice, if
they could ever
>> get rid of the thousands of prostitutes that
'request to be one of
>> your friends'.
>> BarryZ
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From Warren
Michelsen <mailto:WarrenMDCCLXXVI.com>
>> *To
surgemail-listnetwinsite.com
<mailto:surgemail-listnetwinsite.com
>> >
>> *Sent Wednesday,
April 23, 2008 11:02 AM
>> *Subject [SurgeMail
List] Challenge-Response
>> At 7:34 PM -0500 4/21/08, Lyle Giese wrote:
>> >Personally I absolutely detest the
Friends/Challenge system. The
>> >biggest drawback is that users NEVER check to
see what was blocked.
>> >I have exactly three accounts here that have a
Friends/Challenge on
>> >them. All the time, I am seeing the Challenge
go out and we get a
>> >challenge back. And the other party never
checks their pending list
>> >and will never see our challenge.
>> >
>> <Opinion>
>> "Friends" challenges are a rude, selfish
thing. It says, "I'm making
>> more work for you to save myself
bother.</opinion>
>> These challenges just add to the clutter that is
email these days.
>> While it may make things better for the challenger,
it does so at the
>> expense of others.
>> Now, I know that Challenge-Response is a major
component in Netwin's
>> anti-spam toolbox and philosophy and that some on
this list embrace
>> it unreservedly, but I, as my server's admin, would
prefer a way to
>> turn it off globally so that users are not offered
the ability to
>> turn on Challenge-Response at all.
>> I have received challenges from mailing lists,
including this one,
>> and I have received a challenge in response to an
off-list message to
>> a poster who needed help. I never, ever, respond to
these challenges;
>> I don't want to encourage bad behavior. It used to
be that the
>> rudeness factor was my only objection but the
backscatter/clutter
>> problem is increasingly a concern.
>
>
|
