rejecting spam at SMTP time (was Re: Postfix anti-antivirus (was Re: [linux-elitists] etc))
Tue Sep 28 14:38:52 PDT 2004
On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 15:31, Rob McGee wrote:
> For some sites I'm going to get more aggressive than that and use
> dynamic IP blocks. I feel like a hypocrite in doing so since those
> lists used to block ME, but unfortunately it seems to be a very strong
> antispam measure.
I've railed against this for a long time, and even *I* am thinking about
In theory, it's not SO bad. You can set explicit rules for just about
every MTA to go direct if you need to, for example, use TLS direct to a
client or fellow doily smuggler, and they can use whatever mechanism
required to put you in a bypass list.
On the other hand, my concern is that when the dust settles, and we have
a reputation system that's universal enough that spam is no longer a
concern (it WILL happen)... then do we go back, or are we forever locked
into a tiered Internet, where those of us who aren't actively
maintaining a piece of the infrastructure are locked out of getting
involved? This already happened a long time ago for routing, and I have
to admit that THERE, it was required. But, for this... I'm just not sure
150 pieces of spam since my last message.... sigh.
More information about the linux-elitists