-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Does this notion bother anyone, in particular?
The argument for greylisting is apparently no longer - and if it is, it can't be for *much* longer - that, "So what if we can't detect non-MTSs anymore? We can still trap the bad ones by letting our favourite non- greylisting BL spamtraps capture them!" So all Mr. Bad Guy needs to do now is realise the significant uptake of greylisting for this one purpose, and never spam any host that seems to accept all initial transactions. They can do this simply by not entering the DATA state. And if that's used as metric, by sharing data amongst themselves as to the exact purpose of non-greylisting hosts. Any thoughts? Cheers, Sabahattin - -- Sabahattin Gucukoglu <mail<at>sabahattin<dash>gucukoglu<dot>com> Address harvesters, snag this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +44 20 88008915 Mobile: +44 7986 053399 http://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8 Comment: QDPGP - http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html iQA/AwUBR1bgNSNEOmEWtR2TEQJeGACfRn3DRGVvi0C1+ucvPJpW44J6wq8AoLbo qLQCroHslVRBW0AZk6MFyDAh =KFk2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
