Some spam will inevitably get through the graylist filter.  It's not a 
perfect solution but it does stop a lot of spam.  As spammers adopt 
better methods, graylisting will eventually become useless.

-- Sam Clippinger

night duke wrote:
> Well for a strange reason a few emails from spammers are graylisted....
> and i will receive emails from them...
>  
> How can i remove those domains?How can i check mx feature it's working?
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Nightduke
> 
> 
> */Sam Clippinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* escribió:
> 
>     I think I understand your suggestion now. However, adding flags to keep
>     the whitelists from overriding all filters would probably make spamdyke
>     so complicated it would be difficult or impossible to install.
> 
>     Once the new configuration system is in place, you should be able to
>     disable the rDNS tests for specific recipients or remote servers as
>     needed. If it still doesn't do what you need, we can discuss further
>     enhancements.
> 
>     -- Sam Clippinger
> 
>     Ton van Rosmalen wrote:
>      > Hi Sam,
>      >
>      > I didn't mean a separate whitelist for each filter.
>      >
>      > As it is now some connections are terminated with
>     |DENIED_RDNS_MISSING
>      > or ||DENIED_RDNS_RESOLVE |from "valid" but misconfigured mailservers.
>      > I'd like to allow these connections but AFAIK the only option
>     available
>      > is whitelisting them apart from disabling the general rdns checks.
>      > The same would happen when whitelisting the recipient address.
>      >
>      > What I suggested is an option to use graylisting even when a
>      > whitelist-test succeeded.
>      > E.g. an option: graylist-when-whitelisted
>      >
>      > That way at least some level of protection is available in case
>     of abuse
>      > of a whitelisted address.
>      >
>      > Or perhaps I could achieve the same result using:
>      > no-graylist-dir
>      > always-graylist-*
>      > But again, what I read with whitelisting (as it should) in the
>     docs is
>      > "and skip all filters if it is found". Skipping all filters I
>     interpret
>      > as also skipping graylisting.
>      > If I'm wrong please correct me.
>      >
>      > When I look at your description of the upcoming addition I could
>     create
>      > the set-up I would like, so we'll leave this as it is.
>      >
>      > Should you require some help (testing and/or development) of a
>      > (pre-)release do not hesitate to contact me.
>      >
>      > Ton
>      >
>      > Sam Clippinger schreef:
>      >> If I understand you correctly, you want a separate whitelist
>     file for
>      >> each filter? That sounds similar to the "never-graylist-*" and
>      >> "always-graylist-*" options -- whitelists and blacklists that only
>      >> affect the graylist feature.
>      >>
>      >> Keep in mind, adding white/blacklists for just the graylist feature
>      >> created 7 new options. I'm a little hesitant to repeat that
>     effort for
>      >> every filter; spamdyke would gain hundreds of options! Configuring
>      >> spamdyke would become nearly impossible.
>      >>
>      >> I'm currently working on adding a system to allow spamdyke to be
>      >> reconfigured per IP, rDNS, sender and/or recipient. When it's
>     ready,
>      >> you should be able to accomplish what you're trying to do by
>     creating
>      >> new configuration files with specific names. For example, you
>     would be
>      >> able to have a global configuration file that activates all the
>     filters,
>      >> then create some "local" configuration files that deactivate
>     some of the
>      >> filters for specific IP addresses or rDNS names or whatever.
>      >>
>      >> Potentially, you (or someone) could then create a control panel
>     to allow
>      >> users to edit the filters affecting just their mail (or perhaps
>     all mail
>      >> for their domain). Every user could (potentially) have their own
>      >> whitelists, DNS RBLs, etc that are only used when mail is
>     delivered to them.
>      >>
>      >> That system should be ready soon, hopefully in the next version.
>      >>
>      >> -- Sam Clippinger
>      >>
>      >> Ton van Rosmalen wrote:
>      >>
>      >>> Hi all,
>      >>>
>      >>> I've been using spamdyke for a couple of weeks now and I'm very
>     happy
>      >>> with it.
>      >>>
>      >>> As always customers start questioning us about not receiving
>     e-mails
>      >>> from certain senders. After checking the logs the conclusion is
>     always
>      >>> that no rdns is found or that the found name doesn't resolve.
>      >>>
>      >>> The problem that arises is that our customer start complaining
>     about
>      >>> this because "they can't receive orders" etc. For now I've put
>     a couple
>      >>> of the senders ip-addresses on a whitelist to prevent the
>     denial because
>      >>> of their misconfiguration. I've also tried to add greylisting
>     for the
>      >>> domain to provide some degree of anti-spam control.
>      >>>
>      >>> What I (think I) observe is that because of the whitelisting
>     all checks,
>      >>> including greylisting, are skipped.
>      >>>
>      >>> Would it be possible or is it possible to enable a whitelist (ip or
>      >>> senderbased) and still get greylisting? I would think adding
>     this option
>      >>> shouldn't be to hard and am willing to investigate it myself
>     and develop
>      >>> the code for it. Without the option specified everything would
>     remain
>      >>> working as it is of course.
>      >>>
>      >>> Dumb idea? Nice feature? Let me know what you think.
>      >>>
>      >>> Thanks.
>      >>>
>      >>> Regards,
>      >>>
>      >>> Ton
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>>
>      >>> _______________________________________________
>      >>> spamdyke-users mailing list
>      >>> [email protected]
>      >>> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>      >>>
>      >> _______________________________________________
>      >> spamdyke-users mailing list
>      >> [email protected]
>      >> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>      >>
>      >
>      >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > spamdyke-users mailing list
>      > [email protected]
>      > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
>     _______________________________________________
>     spamdyke-users mailing list
>     [email protected]
>     http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ¿Chef por primera vez? - Sé un mejor Cocinillas.
> Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas 
> <http://es.rd.yahoo.com/evt:51361/*http://es.answers.yahoo.com/dir/index;_ylc=X3oDMTE4ZWhyZjU0BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTQzMjIEc2VjA0Jhbm5lcgRzbGsDQWNxdWlzaXRpb24-?link=over&sid=396545367>.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spamdyke-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
_______________________________________________
spamdyke-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users

Reply via email to