> On Jun 24, 2018, at 9:37 AM, Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote: > > J Doe: >> Hello, >> >> I manage a small mail server and have been using Spamcop as a DNSBL?s via >> postscreen: >> >> /etc/postfix/main.cf >> postscreen_dnsbl_sites = bl.spamcop.net >> postscreen_dnsbl_action = drop > > spamcop is not system that flags spambots (systems that send spam > ONLY); it also flags sites that send mostly legitimate mail. > > If you must use spamcop (I would not), you might want to use that > with a small weight so that spamcop alone cannot veto your mail. > Note that postscreen supports weights, while smtpd does not. > > Wietse
Hi Bill and Wietse, Thank you for your replies. Ah, thank you for the warning regarding SpamCop - and also for the note about weighting being a postscreen only feature. I was wondering if perhaps one of the reasons why people tend to use SMTP restrictions instead of postscreen is related to history - IIRC, postscreen came later, so perhaps the reason why I see many examples advocating SMTP restrictions is because that’s how people kept spam away before the release of postscreen ? In terms of weighting, I am assuming that one thing I could do when I have more than one DNSBL (say, 2) is to set a threshold of 2 and have each list weighted as 1 (the default). That would mean that an IP address would have to be listed on both lists before being banned, correct ? Thanks, - J
