So what about Joe Jobs then?  You would prefer to beat some poor guy's
server up when it's not his fault?

Travis

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 4:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Generating SPAM autoresponses.

Marc A. Funaro wrote:

> It's pretty likely that if you go forward with your plan to send responses
to SPAM, you're going to end up on some tough blacklists to be removed from;
this could really hurt the mission critical messaging that you are trying to
preserve.
>
> Fighting spam is a constant fine-tuning process, not a
set-it-and-forget-it proposition.  You'll need to walk a line between false
positives or allowing some SPAM to slip through; in your case, the latter
might be better, combined still with a spam "review" account that is perused
by someone at your organization, perhaps three times per business day, for
false positives.  Or, rather than have it fall on one person, move each SPAM
message to a user's folder on the server for THEM to review regularly; they
could even write some rules against their false positives that ensure that
it doesn't happen again.  (All this, depending of course on your SPAM
solution/filtering techniques to begin with.)
>
> Please, please, reconsider auto-replies to SPAM... it's got real potential
to cause you even more grief than the original spam itself.
>
>
>

Maybe I am misunderstanding the discussion. I will read up on this Imail
auto reply to spam as I do not utilize Imail Anti-Spam features.

I am saying that there is a bounce/response code generated to say that
the message was rejected by some aspect of the filtering process.
Whether it be a dnsbl, local killfile, local content filter or whatever.
The sender gets a message as to why the mail was rejected whether the
sender exists or not. This has been common practice for years and will
remain in effect in my operation. Anyone using a blacklist or blocking
email based on bounces that inform the sender as to why the mail was
rejected is probably not communicating with a good majority of networks
out there. Please inform me of the current blacklists out there that are
listing servers sending 55* response codes back that explain why a
message was rejected.

I am aware of the fine-tuning process involved.

Virus scanners that are still configured to notify the sender are a
different story.

Regards,

John

[EMAIL PROTECTED]




To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/



To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to