Rumor has it that in this case the 'auto responder' is actually a notriously misconfigured MTA.
I welcome any input on post-TMDA filtering, though I really was hoping on not having to work with more than one mechanism. TMDA has been great. On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:58:19PM -0800, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 09:00:57PM -0600, bob wrote: > > > It looks like there may need to be a more complex confiormation > > mechanism needed soon, as it appears soone has written an > > autoresponder tailored to TMDA (and is using a non-bogus email > > address.) > > I don't agree with your conclusion here. TMDA is doing exactly what it's > supposed to do: confirm that the envelope-sender is real, and that the > sender is who he says he is from an MTA perspective. Whether or not the > envelope-sender is a spammer isn't really TMDA's job to determine. > > Once you have a legitimate confirmation (even from a spammer), TMDA > *should* release the email. Then it's up to procmail, bogofilter, > spamassassin, or whatever to determine if the *content* is spam. > > I've gotten a few of these emails in the past few days, too, but they > don't trouble me: bogofilter clearly identifies the spam as a 419 scam, > and circular files it. And if I wanted to be more proactive, since I > have a confirmed envelope-sender, I can blacklist the source at the MTA > level. > > So, I think the solution is simply to enable post-TMDA content > filtering. If you need help with this, let me know, and I'll point you > to some resources. > > -- > Find my Techno-Geek Journal at http://www.codegnome.org/geeklog/ > _____________________________________________ > tmda-users mailing list ([email protected]) > http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([email protected]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
