On Tue, September 26, 2006 9:04 pm, Joey Kelly wrote: > I understand the comment about each mail forwarder needing to match in > terms > of RBLs and other anti-spam and -malware measures. As an example, I run > greylisting, which has proven very effective against unwanted mail. If I > set > up a secondary mail server that didn't greylist, I wouldn't be surprised > if > mail routed around my temporary block on the primary (which is what > greylisting is about), thus defeating all my leet anti-spam measures. > Ditto > RBLs, etc..
This is actually a used spamming technique. Connect to the lowest priority MX server, because it is likely that box was setup with no anti-spam measures in mind. A counter to this is to setup a box at the lowest priority that accepts an SMTP connect, but refuses all mail.
