I filter around 70 % of mail with helo checks, so yes it's needed, and qmail
doesn't have it.
And that's a fact.
Greylisting was mentioned because it's a feature. Feature that will get your
mail 15 minutes delayed, but it will block ... x % amount of spam, i'm not
gonna die tomorrow (hope so) so that's not much of a problem.
I don't use greylisting too, btw.
I use mysql, ldap(somewhere), helo checks(this is a broad term), body
checks(without spamass), etc.
Still kind regards,
Sasa
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:15:53 -0500
Roger Merchberger <zmerch@30below.com> wrote:
> Rumor has it that Jeremy Kitchen may have mentioned these words:
> >Sasa Ugrenovic wrote:
> > > Ok .. i have a question.
> > >
> > > Is qmail usable ?
> >
> >no. Without helo checks and greylisting, it's a completely unreliable MTA.
> >
> >I mean, who could live without helo checks?
>
> A few years ago, I couldn't.... it was a temporarily viable way of blocking
> a lot of zombie botnet crap.
>
> I haven't checked lately, but if I can disregard the advice in my .sig for
> a second, I doubt it does much good anymore... Unforch, I don't have the
> time to actually profile it.
>
> >Greylisting, what's that?
>
> It's a way of breaking SMTP in such a way that will slow down valid mail
> delivery.
>
> ;-)
>
> Laterz,
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger
>
> --
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Profile, don't speculate."
> SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers | Daniel J. Bernstein
> zmerch@30below.com |
>
|