On 02/08/2013 01:19 PM, Eric Shubert wrote: > > On 02/08/2013 10:16 AM, Lutz Petersen wrote: >> Again: >> >> It is a very _bad_ idea to block hosts with the keyword dhcp in the rdns >> name. >> A lot of static hosts (hostingcenter etc.) have this keyword in their rdns >> and >> they all are static. >> >>> 74-142-212-17.dhcp.insightbb.com (74.142.212.17) >> This is listed in the cbl. Only because blacklists need some short time to >> detect >> emitting spam ips it is not worth to create filters that gives you al lot of >> false >> positives. >> >> Lutz Petersen >> > I guess I was one of the unfortunate few who got the email before it was > listed in the RBLs. :( > > I see what you mean, given that all dhcp addresses aren't necessarily > dynamic. I commonly use dhcp to assign fixed (non-dynamic) addresses. > > I suppose that using the keyword "dynamic" would be safe. It wouldn't > have caught this one though.
Sorry, I've seen a lot of "static" domains that are really "dynamic" and visa-versa. Spam control can be a hair-pulling experience. I used to hand-roll my own, tried and discarded many such rules. Spamdyke allowed me to replace it all. The few that get past Spamdyke are mostly caught by SpamAssassin by processing the content of the message. The very small number that get through I don't lose sleep over anymore. Gary _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
