[linux-elitists] Teergrubing and the legality thereof

Peter Clay pete@flatline.org.uk
Mon Sep 1 12:14:44 PDT 2003


On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Jan Wender wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:13:01PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > They're not going to be inconvenienced unless they're shipping 100s of
> > thousands of mails, minimum.
> 
> The problem with teergrubing is the detection of the spamming servers.
> I'm wondering whether it would be feasible to slow mail delivery in general.

You can combine these two ideas: slow down everthing a little, or 4xx it,
but when you do accept mail from a host and it turns out not to be spam
then you auto-whitelist it.

Ian Jackson has written software to do this:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/sauce/
although A) it's written in tcl and B) it's by default a little too
paranoid for most people. SAUCE maintains an "annoyedness" factor for each
host which starts out as "suspicious" and increases if you send it
RFC-compliant ham, and worsens if you send spam or don't have working
reverse DNS. The more annoyed it is, the more heavily you will be
teergrubed.

Pete
-- 
Peter Clay                                         | Campaign for   _  _| .__
                                                   | Digital       /  / | |
                                                   | Rights!       \_ \_| |
                                                   | http://www.ukcdr.org




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list