Matus UHLAR - fantomas a écrit :
>> Bob Proulx a écrit :
>>> The following header line:
>>>
>>> Received: from static-96-254-126-11.tampfl.fios.verizon.net
>>> [96.254.126.11] by
>>> windows12.uvault.com with SMTP; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:26:40 -0400
>>>
>>> Hits the HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR rule. I tested it this way:
>>>
>>> $ perl -le 'if ("static-96-254-126-11.tampfl.fios.verizon.net" =~
>>> /[a-z]\S*\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s]\d+[^\d\s][^\.]*\.\S+\.\S+[^\]]+/) {
>>> print "Yes" } else { print "No" };'
>>> Yes
>>>
>>> But the address doesn't appear to be in a dynamic block. And it
>>> doesn't look like a dynamic address pattern to me.
>
> On 19.08.09 00:48, mouss wrote:
>> The name of the rule is worng, but the result is ok. Instead of
>> "dynamic", I suggest: "UMO" for "Unidentifiable Mailing Object". whether
>> static-ip-.... is static or not doesn't matter. a lot of junk comes from
>> such hosts, and we can't report/complain to a domain, since the domain
>> is that of the SP (and getting SPs to block abuse sources have proven
>> vain).
>
> I'd be glad to see if there's any difference in percentage of spam from
> dynamic and static (generic) IP addresses.
>
http://enemieslist.com/news/archives/2009/07/why_we_suspect.html
> There's also __RDNS_STATIC rule which excludes those "static" from being
> considered as dynamic. There should be one for HELO rules too -
> It would make me angry if I got scored more just because my server is
> properly configured and uses proper helo which is the same as RDNS
> (some helo checks have higher score than RCVD_HELO_IP_MISMATCH)
>
if your PTR is generic, then it is better to set the HELO to a
"non-generic" value. just make it resolve to the same IP. while it is
not always possible to set a "custom" rdns, there is no excuse for not
setting a "meaningful" HELO.
