--- On Thu, 1/14/10, Ben Kamen bka...@benjammin.net wrote:
I've been using spampoison.com of late. Kinda makes me laugh.
I use that resource too.
My web server's malicious robot list is shared with the mail server - so robot
sources get locked out from sending mail. At the firewall level,
David F. Skoll d...@roaringpenguin.com wrote:
wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
Why shouldn't I find some honey-pot addresses and submit submit them to
subscribe?
Because, IMO, that subverts the purpose of honeypots. A honeypot
is designed as a passive spammer attractor; actively subscribing
someone
On 1/14/2010 10:05 AM, Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
David F. Skolld...@roaringpenguin.com wrote:
wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
Why shouldn't I find some honey-pot addresses and submit submit them to
subscribe?
Because, IMO, that subverts the purpose of honeypots. A honeypot
is designed as a passive
Kelson wrote on 01/14/2010 02:43:35 PM:
It's not the effect that's at issue, it's the process.
The whole point of a honeypot is that you have a guarantee that no one
has ever requested that mail go to that address, so any mail sent there
is unsolicited by definition.
If you subscribe an
wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
Kelson wrote on 01/14/2010 02:43:35 PM:
It's not the effect that's at issue, it's the process.
The whole point of a honeypot is that you have a guarantee that no one
has ever requested that mail go to that address, so any mail sent there
is unsolicited by definition.
Playing games with spammers is fun. You could always do something like this:
DNS records:
fake.hostname.example.com. IN MX 10 tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com.
MX 20 mail.example.invalid.
MX 30 localhost.
On 1/14/2010 4:12 PM, - wrote:
I had that for a bit where my low priority MX host was routed to self and SBC
(Ameritech)
used to reject any email from as their servers knew the seconday/low-priority
route was bogus.
Poo.
-Ben
--
Ben Kamen - O.D.T., S.P.
7 matches
Mail list logo
