Stanier, Alan M
alan at essex.ac.uk
Tue May 27 13:37:16 IST 2008
The last time I checked, it was blocking 84% of our spam.
From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: 27 May 2008 13:26
To: mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
Subject: OT: "Nolisting"
I have read that one way of blocking spam is to use a lowest priority MX
record that points to a host that doesn't respond to SMTP requests.
I've seen this idea coined as "nolisting".
The idea is to block the many spammers who target the lowest priority
MX, eg, the one with priority 90 rather than 10 as a way of trying to
circumvent anti-spam measures. If the MX with the lowest priority
doesn't respond then the spammer doesn't try the higher priority MX but
just moves on to the next victim.
Any thoughts on this idea?
Personally, I can see how it would block a percentage of spam but
whether that percentage is high enough to make it a worthwhile idea is
open to question.
Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.9
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
More information about the MailScanner