Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 05:04:32 -0800 (PST) From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, jdow <jdow@earthlink.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Spamcop listed - need help to diagnose why Message-ID: <20060110130432.35587.qmail@web33305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEEFFDAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote: > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On > Behalf Of jdow > >Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 2:12 AM > >To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > >Subject: Re: Spamcop listed - need help to > diagnose why > > > >> > >> Unfortunately, jdow, since your using this > setup, the spammer has > >> already successfully delivered the mail to > you. The fact that you > >> delete the spam before reading makes no > difference - the spammer > >> doesen't know that and thinks they have > successfully delivered it. > > > >No they have not. They've managed to get it > onto my machine, > >transiently. > >It never got delivered to ME, the organic unit > here at this email > >address. > > I know that and your arguing out of your hat - > simply pulling statements > out of context. You know perfectly well that > the "to you" in the > sentence was to your machine, the paragraph > context told you that. > > Unfortunately in the spam game, it only matters > if the spammer > thinks they didn't successfully deliver it to > you. And that only > happens if the machine delivering the spam gets > an error when > trying to deliver it, since the spammer isn't > using legitimate > senders addresses and cannot get feedback any > other way. > > I've never been a fan of post-filters for this > reason. For some > kinds of filtering - like content filtering for > example - that > is the only way you can do it. But I think it > the height of > strangeness when SA checks blacklists and such > to assign scores. > If they really cared about spamfiltering, they > would use the > IP blacklists in the way they are intended - to > block access > completely to the spammer, not even let them > connect to the > server at all. The mail that SA is assigning > scores on based on > an IP blacklist shouldn't even be in the SA > filter to begin with. > > >> Denying the spam before it's even accepted > into the server is a > >> much better way. Unfortunately, a content > filter means you have to > > > >If you can make fetchmail do that you're > pretty clever, kemo sabe. > > > > No, but I can replace the Rube Goldberg > fetchmail arraingement your > using with a real mailserver that is on the > Internet all the time > and can make use of blacklist servers and such. > > And yes, I'm just as good at making > smart-alecky comments as you > are. Probably better at it, actually. Do you > want to knock it > off and go back to the technical merits > discussion now? ;-) YIKES. This is what happens when you put pimply-faced kids in charge of important things like mail. The "carpet bomb MECCA in order to kill a few terrorists" approach to computing. Its frightening. DT __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060110130432.35587.qmail>