Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6}

[Paul Schmehl <pauls () utdallas edu>]

--On October 14, 2006 1:44:04 AM -0400 Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:52:12 CDT, you said:
>
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "split inbound and outbound", but any
> > outbound MX host *should* be listed in DNS.
>
> Tell you what.  Explain what an *OUTBOUND* MX is, and I'll see what I
> can do.
>
> The machine in question is *NOT* listed as an MX, because it is *NOT* a
> machine that should be accepting *inbound* mail for the domain.  Its
> purpose in life is to send mail to off-campus sites.
It appears that what you're missing is that this one "flaw" is not enough 
to get mail rejected by policyd-weight.  Policyd-weight, much like SA, 
works on cumulative scoring.  One "bad" thing isn't going to get your mail 
rejected.  But, in general, spam, viruses, phishing scams, et. al. will 
not only not be listed as an MX in DNS, they also won't reverse.  They 
also forge the domain.  They also lie about the sender domain.  They also 
come from dialups or from known "spammy" servers.  So, the *cumulative* 
effect is that the mail gets rejected.

One "flaw" such as a missing MX record is not going to cause a problem.

Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

Attachment: _bin
Description: