Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Spam Filters Not Catching Repeating Offenders?

Expand Messages
  • Noel Jones
    ... That s irrelevant. The client doesn t claim to be unknown, it s labeled that way by postfix because (in this case) there s no A record for the rDNS
    Message 1 of 21 , Mar 30 2:34 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      LuKreme wrote:
      > On 30-Mar-2009, at 14:40, Noel Jones wrote:
      >> LuKreme wrote:
      >>> On 30-Mar-2009, at 13:20, Carlos Williams wrote:
      >>>> Received: from (unknown
      >>>> [])
      >>>> by mail.ideorlando.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 910AA1FA4D9E
      >>>> for <everyone@...>; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:32:52 -0400 (EDT)
      >>> There are so many spam warnings in that header...
      >>> /^unknown$/ REJECT helo No unknown hostnames
      >>> in your helo checks is a fantastic idea.
      >> "unknown" isn't the helo, it's an unknown client. This client could
      >> be rejected with reject_unknown_client_hostname, but that rejects too
      >> much legit mail for most sites.
      > It's also not a FQDN (or at least not a valid one).

      That's irrelevant. The client doesn't claim to be unknown,
      it's labeled that way by postfix because (in this case)
      there's no A record for the rDNS hostname.

      Using an access table to reject anything labeled "unknown" is
      unwise; you can't distinguish temporary errors and may reject
      clients you would normally accept.

      If you want to reject unknown clients, use
      reject_unknown_client_hostname, which handles temporary errors
      gracefully. Note this restriction is considered very strict
      and is likely to reject legit mail.

      -- Noel Jones
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.