Re: [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From jseymour@LinxNet.com (Jim Seymour)
Subject Re: [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters?
Date
Msg-id 20040422111632.77FCA4307@jimsun.LinxNet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [OT] Tom's/Marc's spam filters?  (Will Trillich <will@serensoft.com>)
List pgsql-general
>
[snip]
>
> I think I looked into this a while ago and couldn't figure out a way to
> discard a message from my MX without downloading it.  Any ideas out
> there?

The problem is, again, as I noted earlier, this also breaks the mail
system.  Would you really trust blind blocking by IP address not to
suffer the occasional false positive?  It's bad enough when a FP
causes a reject but, at least then, the legitimate sender gets the
bounce and *knows* their email wasn't delivered.  If you throw email
that some rule says you don't want into the bit-bucket, that feedback
goes away.  IOW: It breaks the mail system.

>
> The sendmail code looks like:
[snip]
>

/me doesn't do sendmail.  (One of the first things I replace on every
install I do, as a matter-of-fact.)  The MTA I use (Postfix) would
allow me to specify DISCARD, after a rule, to accomplish this.

But, again, your backup MX is probably doing no more for you than
causing you to agonize over which different way to break the mail
system or irritate unwitting, innocent 3rd parties ;).  Better to
just rid yourself of the backup MX, IMO.

--
Jim Seymour                | Spammers sue anti-spammers:
jseymour@LinxNet.com       |     http://www.LinxNet.com/misc/spam/slapp.php
http://jimsun.LinxNet.com  | Please donate to the SpamCon Legal Fund:
                           |     http://www.spamcon.org/legalfund/

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Stijn Vanroye"
Date:
Subject: Re: What is wrong here?
Next
From: "John Sidney-Woollett"
Date:
Subject: Unicode + LC_COLLATE