[wplug] SpamAssassin

[Bill Moran]

Clark Slater wrote:
> I have spam issues and was considering SA.
> Exactly what do you mean by 'blocking'?

Postfix has config options to refuse to accept mail from mailservers
under certain conditions.  I'm using 3 of these exensively.
1) If the DNS config for that mailserver is broken (i.e. the server says it's
    mail.joeshouse.com, and no such domain exists, or no PTR record exists
    for the IP address)  This one blocks more spam than anything else ... most
    spammers don't take time to properly configure their DNS, they probably
    don't even understand how.
2) If the IP of that server is on any one of a number of blacklists (spamcop,
    njabl)
3) If that server is on my _personal_ list of domains that have consistenly
    spammed me in the past while completely ignoring my attempts get them to
    fix the problem.

#1 is (by far) the most effective.  I guess that when you figure that
spammers are criminals, it's no surprise that they're also stupid.

> On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
> 
>>Beyond that, I think sa is simply unnecessary complexity.  (I'm very much
>>against unnecessary complexity)  It was on the list of things to put on our
>>mail server originally, but when we saw how well blocking worked, we decided
>>not to bother.



-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com