[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: VGER does gradual SPF activation (FAQ matter)
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 22:54 -0700, jdow wrote:
> From: "Horst von Brand" <>
> > jdow <> wrote:
> >> Greylist those who have not subscribed.
> >> Let their email server try
> >> again in 30 minutes. For those who are not subscribed it should not
> >> matter if their message is delayed 30 minutes. And so far spammers
> >> never try again.
> >
> > Wrong. Greylisting does stop an immense amount of spam here, but a lot
> > comes through.

On one low traffic domain, we perceived 50% less spam with greylisting.
But spam is rising.

> So if it's not perfect it's not worth doing at all, eh? Yet you think

It works now but the next generation viruses/trojans/.... will have real
MTA functionality (i.e. SMTP 100% correct) and it is not a problem since
the zombie nets are large enough that that won't hurt anyone really.

> SPF, which is FAR less suited as a spam preventative, is a single

No means alone will kill spam (except making email as such as expensive
as snail mail). So comparing different means makes no sense.

Firmix Software GmbH
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-13 10:42    [W:0.133 / U:2.984 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site