I can see this, but what about hosts that ignore MX records and just connect direct?
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 01:26:37PM -0700, John W. Baxter wrote: > On 5/17/05 12:53 PM, "Jaye Mathisen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I've been reading on greylisting, and thinking about integrating > > it. > > > > However, one question sticks in my head, if you authenticate auser via > > some SMTP-AUTH method, then is grey-listing bypassed? > Not an issue here, as the Exim instances that customers talk to are separate > from the MX that the world talks to. > > > > > I was also thinking about going to really short intervals. Like 5 minutes. > > We use a Python daemon we wrote here (which tracks using a MySQL database). > Exim gets a simple ACCEPT or DEFER back from the daemon, and acts > accordingly. (Mostly at RCTP TO: time, but we defer the <> sender and some > others to DATA time for greylisting (to avoid issues with those doing > callbacks), and we have whitelisting in a database with fairly fine-grained > control (not quite fine enough, unfortunately)). > > Keeps a lot of messages out of our system (including the new Sober), and the > drivel that the machines infected with the new Sober are now spewing out. > > A process runs every 5 minutes to clean up the database. > > The separate daemon is much easier than trying to make Exim make the > decisions. > > --John > > > > -- > ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users > ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ > ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ > > > !DSPAM:428a4e66472017933015357! > -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
