On 17/10/06, gabriel rosenkoetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 12:17:51PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> It appears that what you're missing is that this one "flaw" is not enough
> to get mail rejected by policyd-weight.
What you're missing is that the assumption that systems sending
valid mail will always (or even will usually) be listed in DNS is
fundamentally wrong and should never be used even as a weighted
guess to indicate spam.
Well, they may be listed in SPF records, though I agree not in MX.
And by itself, I don't believe SPF provides a useful indication one
way or the other as to whether a message is spam or not. Lots of
spammers set up SPF records these days.
cheers,
Jamie
--
Jamie Riden, CISSP / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NZ Honeynet project - http://www.nz-honeynet.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Black Hat
Attend the Black Hat Briefings & Training USA, July 29-August 3 in Las Vegas.
World renowned security experts reveal tomorrow's threats today. Free of
vendor pitches, the Briefings are designed to be pragmatic regardless of your
security environment. Featuring 36 hands-on training courses and 10 conference
tracks, networking opportunities with over 2,500 delegates from 40+ nations.
http://www.blackhat.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
