You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > Mailman Archives
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: spam SW, EMS/RFMS

  • To:
  • From: Gunnar Lindberg < >
  • Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:24:56 +0100 (MET)
  • Cc:

>Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:41:32 +0100 (MET)
>From: Ulf Vedenbrant uffe@localhost

>Unfortunately you cannot block <> since there are a lot of mailing-
>that use tha as a "from"-address...
>( except from other reasons.. )

Sorry, I should have been more clear about that. Correct, you cannot
ever deny "MAIL From:<>" into your local system, for the reason Ulf
mentions. However, you could possibly refuse to act as Mail Relay
for that - I've though of it but haven't yet got sendmail to hand
out enough information to the Schek* rules. And, what I did was more
to use who sent "MAIL From:<>" to manually select what dialup ISPs
seems to carry many such EMS/RFMS spammers.

>Why use secondary MX?
>The sending MTA will keep the mail in any case until 1'MX is up...

To get the mail "closer" to us so that we - - can see
that some subdomain's mail server is down and have them take action
(often we notice before they do). This is probably a difference
between my university, where we are all one happy family (hm :-),
and an ISP with customers.

BUT, the bottom line is I serously refuse to configure our MX-records
and Relaying based on spammers. It's possible, perhaps eveen likely,
that I'll eventually have to give up and admit their victory, but
that will not go without fight.


  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>