On 08/06/03 at 09:50 -0400, Neil Herber opined:
> It is rumored that on or about 8/6/03 8:44 AM -0500, NetHead wrote as
follows:
> >I don't know if it's just something quirky in my settings or if it's
> >simply a commentary on the insidious nature of spammers.
> >
> >I'm starting to get spam now addressed to my "abuse" account
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>! And some of it appears to be coming from
> >IP's in my blacklist! This is, of course, possible because I have to
> >"whitehole" the abuse account to deal with anyone I have
> >inadvertently blacklisted. Talk about your Catch-22's!
I have both 'abuse' and 'postmaster' whiteholed (postmaster because it's
required by the RFCs to accept mail). I don't (so far) get spam addressed
to 'abuse' but I get tons of it to 'postmaster'. I've always thought it's
mildly amusing that spammers don't automatically purge 'postmaster'
addresses out of their lists. After all, if anyone is going to actively try
to prevent them from continuing to spew their crap it'll be postmasters,
and I'd think it would be best not to call that kind of attention to
yourself if your a spammer. But then, nobody ever said it takes much brain
power to be a spammer...
> >Anybody else have this problem? What do you do? Just trash the spam and
> >go on?
I never just trash spam and move on. I look at the IP addresses of the
hosts that relay it to my server, whether it's addressed to a whiteholed
address or not. If the IP is not already blacklisted either in my internal
list or by an RBL that I use, I will consider blacklisting it (depending on
who it belongs to and other partially subjective factors). I'll also look
at the return-path to see if it might be worth routing to error. Since I
get approx. 30-50 spam messages a day (a drop in the bucket compared to
some people on the list, I'm sure) this takes a non-trivial amount of time,
but I think (hope) that it's worth it in terms of reducing the amount of
spam my users have to deal with.
> As I understand it, the only account you MUST have is "postmaster".
> An abuse account would normally be used for people to report spam
> from your network, not to complain about being blacklisted.
> Blackilist problems, bad addresses, and other service related
> difficulties should be reported to postmaster.
>
> If I were you I would just make "abuse" a spam trap.
Um, if 'abuse' is supposed to be an address to which people are supposed to
be able to send complaints about spam and other net abuse coming, or
appearing to come, from your network, doesn't it seem a bit rude to spam
trap it?
--
Christopher Bort | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webmaster, Global Homes | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<http://www.globalhomes.com/>
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
