Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6}
From: Paul Schmehl <pauls () utdallas edu>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 17:38:41 -0500
--On Monday, October 09, 2006 16:28:24 -0600 Brent Kearney <brent () kearneys ca> wrote:
I would submit to you that any university that doesn't reverse all internet-facing hosts needs to hire new people to handle DNS. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to write pointer records.Some university campuses maintain strict control over their reverse DNS entries, and so departments or on-campus organizations, research institutes, etc. that run their own mail servers will have non-matching forward and reverse DNS entries on their MX hosts. Blocking rules like this make life difficult for them as well.
Having said that, read my response to Tim to see why that's not necessarily a problem. Or better yet, read the link I sent rather than assuming how the program works.
Very simple. Anyone whose email bounces complains to me personally at a known good address on a separate domain. So far I've had one complaint, and I simply adjusted the scoring to overcome the stupidity of his ISP.Cases such as these raise the question, if the blocked mail never gets into your network, how would you know about the rate of false-positives?
Obviously, my brief description wasn't meant to fully explain how policyd-weight works. Read the docs. It's far from a brute-force tool to reject email.
Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase, (continued)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase Kurt Seifried (Oct 08)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} Vini Engel (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} Kurt Seifried (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Vini Engel (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Paul Schmehl (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Tim (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Paul Schmehl (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Nathaniel Hall (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Tim (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Brent Kearney (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Paul Schmehl (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} Vini Engel (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase Kurt Seifried (Oct 08)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Graeme Fowler (Oct 09)
- Re: Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Luke Burton (Oct 09)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase Tillmann Werner (Oct 10)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 16)
- Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Paul Schmehl (Oct 16)
- Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 16)
- Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Paul Schmehl (Oct 16)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase gabriel rosenkoetter (Oct 16)
- Re: Massive SPAM Increase Jamie Riden (Oct 17)
- Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6} Dude VanWinkle (Oct 17)