----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Marty Lamb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:47 AM Subject: Re: tarproxy fails to reduce spam
... > Now, one concept that I've been rolling around in my head, is > somehow using tarproxy (or something like it) to temporarily refuse > to accept a mail message, for a given period of time (e.g., a day or > three). Not only do you slow down their connection to the maximum > allowed by the spec, but you go so far as to make them keep the > message until you're ready to finally allow it through a few days > later. > > Spammers won't bother to queue the message on disk, and they'll > just throw it away. Any relays that they pay for will have some > serious disk space & disk I/O capacity issues. I think asking dubious relays to try again "Later" (4xx ?) is an excellent idea! Once the hosts are known not to be "dubious" mail can be accepted immediatly. The host retrying later for the same user is a small example of it non-dubious behaviour. I'm also in favour of dropped connections with dubious hosts after getting a sample of the message. Drop the connection, submit the text to DCC or some other fuzzy checksum clearing house and when it comes in the second time (if it does) there's more to go on. Perhaps not all of this behaviour is desirable (I'm not convinced) but the 4xx later for dubious hosts is a top idea. Sam
