Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marc Perkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jeroen van Aart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 4:20 PM > Subject: Re: [exim] Out of Office and collateral spam > > > >> I have a little different take on the out of office backscatter. Even >> though it is somewhat annoying I actually count ham points for it when >> it comes to my blacklisting because spammers don't host auto responders. >> My take is that ham from people who have morons for email admins is >> still ham. But to clarify, I do try to block spam generated OoO >> backscatter, but I try to make sure that it doesn't count against the >> host's IP karma score. The same is true of sender address verification. >> Spammers aren't verifying addresses on incoming email. >> > > What about spam pretending to be OOO ? e.g. "Sorry I am OOO - but you can > always order online", and how would you distinguish between the 2 ? > > >
Spam pretending to be OoO is still a problem. But in my case it just means someone is not blacklisted that perhaps should be. Ultimately false positives are a bigger mistake than false negatives. But it is interesting having logic based on the idea that "spammers aren't stupid enough to do xxx, therefore it's probably not a spam source". -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
