Hello. > > ... but since Sendmail MTA required it from the beginning (when the > > only open source choice was SM), actually every spammer software > sends > > HELO (very broken software too). > > You are right. I looked at this issue closely today: Not one spam mail > without HELO/EHLO. > > > So who you will block with this patch? > > At least there is a low risk for false positives, since Google and so > do the same...
Well, we do not use that patch but a very similar one which integrates a Helo/ehlo delay combined with a blacklist and a reject for early-talkers too. Analyzing logs and statistics we see thousands of early-talkers per hou and blacklisted helo/ehlos, but indeed a very small count of no helo/ehlo. But all these can mostly be connected with Trojan or bot infected clients. So using a no_helo patch alone will not do so much good, but combining helo/ehlo related checks make it better. Greets Phil.
