You are not currently logged in. If you do not have a user account then please consider creating one and logging in before you post your comment. This will allow you to track replies to your comment, and take part in the site much more freely.

To add your comment, fill in all the boxes below and then preview it to make sure you're happy with the way that it looks.

This is the comment you were replying to, attached to the weblog Nolisting - another anti-spam method?

#4 Re: Nolisting - another anti-spam method? Posted by simonw (84.45.xx.xx) on Thu 1 Feb 2007 at 16:25 The comments seem rather harsh. I'd be interested in knowing the results. Since we provide greylisting when we register/hold a domain for a client, I don't see much need for a "poor mans" greylisting. Greylisting implementations are free software, and available gratis and nicely packaged in Debian, so one doesn't need to give up cash, or liberty, to deploy greylisting. The gotchas I see with nolisting; You need to make sure the first MX is a valid IP (rfc-ignorant will list badly configured primary MX records). You need to make sure the first MX is never listening on port 25. Since spambots exist that try secondary MXes in preference, so I doubt it is a big win. I'm also very surprised they claim zero false positives, as even greylisting that merely simulates a server being busy, results in wanted emails not being delivered due to servers that don't retry if the primary MX is busy. I'd be stunned if everything out there follows the RFCs as regards secondary MXes. I also still see email (and spam) sent to the A record for domains that have an MX record listed. I suspect some blacklists, use this broken fail-over behaviour to identify some spambots. But it hints at a lot of brokenness in this area of SMTP.

Username:	Anonymous
Title:
Your Comment:
Posting Format:	BBCode HTML Text Plain Text Textile

Inappropriate comments will be removed.

Username:

Password:

[ Advanced Login ]

Register Account