North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques
On Oct 22, 2007, at 11:41 AM, Sean Figgins wrote:
Dave Pooser wrote:
Where did you get that 99% #?
Even if you confirm your email address, that's all that spamarrest is asking for. If the email address is valid, then it's done it's job. If the email address is not valid, then the spam gets stopped.
That is neither the statement that most CR systems make in their challenge, nor what most people who use the system think it means.
I use a challenge-response system in conjunction with other techniques, and have reduced the amount of spam I have to deal with by a couple orders of magnitude.
I'm sure you have. I'm also certain you have put a burden on other people, which is the reason we all hate spam
I also advise the list membership here that if they DON'T want to get the challenge from my agent, they should send responses through the list.
That would be me. :)
As fas as the original poster... When I was working for a particular MSO the topic came up for filtering port 25. It took me about a minute to convince them that it was a bad idea, as a lot of people with broadband are the work-fro-home type, and not all of them VPN into their work, but instead use their corporate SMTP/POP/ IMAP server to do their business. Since handling these valid servers on a ticket basis would prove to be too much work, the plan was scrapped.
I'm not at all certain I agree with your reasoning. If someone wants to send e-mail from home, they can use 587, or your server, or VPN, or .....
I am assuming you also do not list your IP addresses in the PBL? So the "99%" of your users who do _not_ need to work from home, but are infected, are allowed to spew spam at me?
-- TTFN, patrick