RBL & greylisting on Ubuntu.com smtp

[Lionel Dricot]

As you may have seen on PUC, I took the time to configure SA and, so
far, I have a 100% spam-ham recognition ratio without using RBL or
greylisting :-)

On 6/20/06, Lionel Dricot <zeploum at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is, AFAIK, the default postgrey behaviour in Debian. There's also
> a long list of whitelisted smtps known to have a slow retry rate.
>
> But spammers are getting better every day. They often retry to avoid
> greylisting and they don't put fake outlook header and so on.
>
> In facts, on my ubuntu address, I receive everyday 10-15 spams that
> have a 0.0 score with spamassassin ! SA doesn't detect anything at all
> with those spams ! Weird :-(
>
> On 6/20/06, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen at canonical.com> wrote:
> > * Scott Dier
> >
> > | I've seen mails be delayed by 12 hours or more due to greylisting
> > | and address verification combined with lamely configured mail MX
> > | clusters. (if you don't share the greylist between a setup of 5 MX
> > | servers, you shall configure it, now. really.)
> >
> > Which is why greylisting on the /24 netblock instead of the exact ip
> > address usually is a good choice.  Most mail server farms seem to live
> > on the same subnet.
> >
> > --
> > Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
> > UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
> >                                                                       `. `'
> >                                                                         `-
> >
> > --
> > sounder mailing list
> > sounder at lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder
> >
>