RBL & greylisting on Ubuntu.com smtp

This is, AFAIK, the default postgrey behaviour in Debian.
There's also
a long list of whitelisted smtps known to have a slow retry
rate.

But spammers are getting better every day. They often retry
to avoid
greylisting and they don't put fake outlook header and so
on.

In facts, on my ubuntu address, I receive everyday 10-15
spams that
have a 0.0 score with spamassassin ! SA doesn't detect
anything at all
with those spams ! Weird :-(

On 6/20/06, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheencanonical.com> wrote:
> * Scott Dier
>
> | I've seen mails be delayed by 12 hours or more due
to greylisting
> | and address verification combined with lamely
configured mail MX
> | clusters. (if you don't share the greylist between a
setup of 5 MX
> | servers, you shall configure it, now. really.)
>
> Which is why greylisting on the /24 netblock instead of
the exact ip
> address usually is a good choice.  Most mail server
farms seem to live
> on the same subnet.
>
> --
> Tollef Fog Heen                                        
               ,''`.
> UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its
friends are      : :' :
>                                                        
              `. `'
>                                                        
                `-
>
> --
> sounder mailing list
> sounderlists.ubuntu.com
> htt
ps://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder
>

-- 
sounder mailing list
sounderlists.ubuntu.com
htt
ps://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder

As you may have seen on PUC, I took the time to configure SA
and, so
far, I have a 100% spam-ham recognition ratio without using
RBL or
greylisting 

On 6/20/06, Lionel Dricot <zeploumgmail.com> wrote:
> This is, AFAIK, the default postgrey behaviour in
Debian. There's also
> a long list of whitelisted smtps known to have a slow
retry rate.
>
> But spammers are getting better every day. They often
retry to avoid
> greylisting and they don't put fake outlook header and
so on.
>
> In facts, on my ubuntu address, I receive everyday
10-15 spams that
> have a 0.0 score with spamassassin ! SA doesn't detect
anything at all
> with those spams ! Weird :-(
>
> On 6/20/06, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheencanonical.com> wrote:
> > * Scott Dier
> >
> > | I've seen mails be delayed by 12 hours or more
due to greylisting
> > | and address verification combined with lamely
configured mail MX
> > | clusters. (if you don't share the greylist
between a setup of 5 MX
> > | servers, you shall configure it, now. really.)
> >
> > Which is why greylisting on the /24 netblock
instead of the exact ip
> > address usually is a good choice.  Most mail
server farms seem to live
> > on the same subnet.
> >
> > --
> > Tollef Fog Heen                                   
                    ,''`.
> > UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who
its friends are      : :' :
> >                                                   
                   `. `'
> >                                                   
                     `-
> >
> > --
> > sounder mailing list
> > sounderlists.ubuntu.com
> > htt
ps://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder
> >
>

-- 
sounder mailing list
sounderlists.ubuntu.com
htt
ps://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder