I see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callback_verification

I agree with Gary on this.

I think a SPF checker would be more useful. I know that's already on the 
list of enhancements.

Thanks again.

-- 
-Eric 'shubes'

On 07/06/2012 02:33 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> I used that for a bit and found that it wasn't very useful. There are a
> lot of false negatives and virtually all were rejected by another check.
> Today's spammers don't have troubles grabbing a real email address from
> their lists. I'd like to see some hard data that would show it
> beneficial. There is already a lot of DNS lookups per connection to add
> one with no benefit.
>
> I suppose it would reject backscatter spam but not much else.
>
> Gary
> -- Sent from my HP TouchPad
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Jul 6, 2012 4:43 PM, Mark Frater <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I'm talking about sender-verification also known as call-out
> verification. It can be used for smtp auth or incoming mail or both.
> This is where the mail server first verifies that the 'sender's address'
> actaully exists before delivering the message. It does this by
> connecting to the sender's MX and attempting to send a message to the
> sender but quitting before the data command. Usually done as follows:
> helo, mail from: <>, rcpt to: sender@domain, check reply, quit. If 250,
> sender is verified and the mail is allowed through (and generally the
> verification result will also be cached for a variable time so as not to
> be abused in floods etc). The reason why I said this feature is of less
> importance is because it does have the potential to be abused. Though it
> seems quite widely used these days.
>
> Regards,
> Mark
>
>
> On 06 Jul 2012, at 10:07 PM, Eric Shubert
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  > Nice suggestions, Mark. Thanks.
>  >
>  > On 07/06/2012 12:36 PM, Mark Frater wrote:
>  >> Lastly and perhaps less as important would be the sender
> verification process which is listed in the smtp RFC but which qmail has
> no standard ability to perform. Once again this is a standard feature
> available in postfix.
>  >
>  > Are you talking about smtp-auth capability here, or something else?
>  > Which RFC/feature?
>  >
>  > --
>  > -Eric 'shubes'
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > 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

Reply via email to