On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:48 AM, Charles Cazabon wrote:
Sami Farin <safari-qmail@safari.iki.fi> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 09:36:59 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
...
-blocking mail based on the client being dynamically addressed
blocks
legitimate mail
Sure... What's the ratio? 1:100000 (ham:spam)?
I don't know, because I don't have statistics on how much of my
mail comes
from dynamically-addressed hosts. And if you block mail from
dynamically-addressed hosts, *you don't know either*.
The people who seem most sure that this doesn't block "much"
legitimate mail
appear to be exactly those people who can't know it, because they
*are*
blocking mail with this technique.
i can only be sure how many mails i am bouncing back from rblsmtpd.
in terms of how many were legitimate, that requires either the sender
or recipient to notify me in some "what the hell is going on?"
fashion which happens about every full moon in my case--about 500
users on my system(s) that i pay attention to, the others don't use
the system's email functions enough to complain.
in this case i don't need pie charts or fancy scripts to investigate
the worth, proof is in the pudding and so far it tastes good.
do you ever use badmailfrom? ever get blasted (in a bad way) from a
host and respond by not allowing that machine to connect to your
server? (insert your variation here) ever think that might be
blocking some legitimate email perhaps? blocking email is not a sin,
your justification for doing so might be and is judged by those who
employ us. i refuse to allocate my resources to assist the crippled,
those days are over...imho this is the case of many bad apples
spoiling the few.
--
Jason Kawaja, 2-4568
IT Expert, UF Dept of ECE
|