|
[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
[NMLUG] now that the spam is under control...
- Subject: [NMLUG] now that the spam is under control...
- From: _sarang_ at sarangworld.com (Sarang)
- Date: Tue Nov 9 17:37:14 2004
- In-reply-to: <20041109155227.GB1470@rosenberg.net>
For what it's worth, I believe the majority of spam comes from
non-existant email addresses (eg, random_string@yahoo.com).
My "spam protection" comes from auto-replying to people who send email to
"sarang@sarangworld.com" and other addresses (not
"_sarang_@sarangworld.com" though, so responses to this email won't
receive an auto reply). A surprisingly large percentage of my auto-replies
bounce with "user unknown" or similar errors (of course, this instantly
alerts me that the original message was spam [and/or the sender has their
mail client configured improperly]).
I've sent legit emails that were flagged as spams (at one point, Comcast's
SMTP server was on a DNSBL!), and I appreciated receiving a reply so I
could contact the recipient in some other manner-- I don't think
blackholing possibly legit emails is a good idea (if a server is going to
reject my email, I'd like to at least know about it!). Including a simple
message like "many viruses/spams spoof the sender address, so maybe you
didn't send this after all" clears up any confusion on the sender's end.
Ideally, all antispam filters would bounce email at the SMTP level (so all
of my bounce messages would come from my own SMTP server), but, even when
this isn't the case, I'd like to be notified when an email I send bounces.
--
Sincerely, Sarang (sarang@sarangworld.com)
AOL Instant Messenger ID: JavaMath
Backup Email: saranghome@softhome.net
<html><img src='http://noproxy.sarangworld.com/EXP/rr.php?20041109.131552'></html>
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 08:52:27 -0700
> From: Kevin Rosenberg <kevin@rosenberg.net>
> Reply-To: New Mexico Linux Users Group Mail List <nmlug@nmlug.org>
> To: New Mexico Linux Users Group Mail List <nmlug@nmlug.org>
> Subject: Re: [NMLUG] now that the spam is under control...
>
> Jody Harris wrote:
> > Once I cleared up the technical difficulties that made SpamAssassin stop
> > working for about three weeks, the spam went away. Now, it seems that
> > many corporations have gotten on the spam wagon, and they're rejecting
> > mail back to "sender." That's "sender" as the e-mail envelope says, anyway.
>
> I think the fundamental idea of sending a reject notice for spam is
> incorrect. Given that a large percentage (likely a majority) of spam
> is sent with a forged From: address makes it ludicrous to send a
> reject notice to that address. It is worse than useless. It causes
> confusion for email users whose email address has been forged and then
> they get a message that they have been sending spam. It causes spam to
> consume greater resources.
>
> > Any thoughts?
>
> MDA reciepes to delete them is reasonable as an end-user. Long-term, I
> think education of the spam blocking administators that such rejects
> are harmful would be the best solution.
>
> --
> Kevin Rosenberg
> kevin@rosenberg.net
> _______________________________________________
> NMLUG mailing list
> NMLUG@nmlug.org
> http://www.nmlug.org/mailman/listinfo/nmlug
>
|
|
