--On Wednesday, 05 December, 2007 17:30 +0000 Sabahattin
Gucukoglu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does this notion bother anyone, in particular?
>
> The argument for greylisting is apparently no longer - and if
> it is, it can't be for *much* longer - that, "So what if we
> can't detect non-MTSs anymore? We can still trap the bad
> ones by letting our favourite non- greylisting BL spamtraps
> capture them!"
>
> So all Mr. Bad Guy needs to do now is realise the significant
> uptake of greylisting for this one purpose, and never spam
> any host that seems to accept all initial transactions. They
> can do this simply by not entering the DATA state. And if
> that's used as metric, by sharing data amongst themselves as
> to the exact purpose of non-greylisting hosts.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> Sabahattin
First, your subject line appears to be wrong to me: "everyone"
other than honeypots do not greylist.
Second, if I correctly understand what you are proposing above
(and it is possible that I do not), why do you believe that the
spammers will cooperate in behaving the way you want/ expect?
They have about zero incentive to go to extra effort to not send
mail to particular addresses unless doing so will net them a
_huge_ (think severals orders of magnitude) increase in the
number of messages that get delivered.
john
http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/you-might-be.html
