spamassassin not lethal anymore
Russell L. Carter
rcarter at pinyon.org
Thu Jan 12 01:34:30 UTC 2017
On 01/11/17 17:24, Kurt Buff wrote:
> Snippety snip...
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Russell L. Carter <rcarter at pinyon.org> wrote:
>> On 01/11/17 14:05, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 13:45:47 -0700
>>> "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter at pinyon.org> wrote:
>>> most of it botnet sourced. I've pretty much eliminated it now by a
>>> combination of installing dcc and razor plugins to spamassassin (reduced
>>> the spam getting through by 70% or so) and adding a backup MX with a free
>>> service that only accepts messages to relay when the primary is down (it's
>>> amazing how much spam stopped coming in when I did that).
>> I'm not sure what you mean here, can you elaborate a bit more? I can
>> do anything I like with my MX hosts so I'm game. I *think* I'm
>> already doing that. I have multiple domains, and so I have a primary
>> MX and a couple of backup MX hosts (one of which is effectively a
>> passive dovecot replicator, lordy that works fantastic). The backup
>> MX hosts are lower priority than the primary. Are you doing something
> A secondary MX that refuses mail when the primary is up and running
> foils one of the favorite tactics of spammers - they will often target
> the secondary MX because those are often not as up to date with
> anti-spam measures. Most spambots try one MX, one time only.
> Many spambots will try that secondary MX, get refused with a 4xx
> error, and not bother to try the primary MX at all.
> It can be a big win, in the right situation.
Ah. Awesome. How do I do that?
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-questions