Re: [spamassassin] Re: [spamassassin] Re: How to report 120,000 spams a day

[SM <sm...@resistor.net>]

At 11:01 09-03-2008, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
>         I guess I'm still not being clear. There are 120K emails a day coming
>to INVALID EMAIL ADDRESSES THAT NEVER EXISTED. Its not a case of a user being
>fickle, its a case that they are emailing addresses that NEVER EVER ACTUALLY
>EXISTED. About 1 ever 3/4 of a second. So running them through ANYTHING is
>counter productive since , atleast in my eyes, if you try to email an email
>address that never existed... ITS SPAM. Its not things the user ever 
>sees/knows,

I see delivery attempts to invalid email address regularly.  They get 
rejected at the SMTP level.  Running such messages through 
SpamAssassin doesn't make sense.  Your previous message mentioned 
that you wanted to report these "spam" messages and my reply was 
based upon that.

>etc. I have in my sendmail virtusertable:
>
>bingo@example.com                       bingo
>bangob@example.com                      bango
>bongo@example.com                       bongo
>irving@example.com                      irving
>*@example.com                           nobody

The above is incorrect as there is still a processing overhead.  I 
suggest using:

@example.com                           error:nouser User unknown

Regards,
-sm 

Re: How to report

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>]

> > >etc. I have in my sendmail virtusertable:
> > >*@example.com                           nobody

> > The above is incorrect as there is still a processing overhead.  I 
> > suggest using:
> > 
> > @example.com                           error:nouser User unknown

On 09.03.08 15:05, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> 	Can't do that as much as I'd like to. Mail comes through
> an MX. The MX just passes it along. When the final machine errors
> it out, the MX is stuck with trying to get rid of it. The postmaster
> also ends up getting a copy of the emails (Yes, I could turn that off,
> but for the number of times its pointed out potential hacks, system
> issues, etc, I'd rather not. ).

It would be good to set up LDAP or similar addressing that could reject mail
to unknown user even on MX relay.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Microsoft dick is soft to do no harm

Re: [spamassassin] Re: [spamassassin] Re: [spamassassin] Re: How to report

["Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET" <ml...@t-b-o-h.net>]

> 
> I see delivery attempts to invalid email address regularly.  They get 
> rejected at the SMTP level.  Running such messages through 
> SpamAssassin doesn't make sense.  Your previous message mentioned 
> that you wanted to report these "spam" messages and my reply was 
> based upon that.
>
	I don't run them through SA. I /dev/null them. They are going
to an email address that doesn't exist, especially 120K of them a day to
a SINGLE domain, they are spam and don't even need to be run through
SA or anything else. They get discarded as soon as they arrive.
> 
> >etc. I have in my sendmail virtusertable:
> >
> >bingo@example.com                       bingo
> >bangob@example.com                      bango
> >bongo@example.com                       bongo
> >irving@example.com                      irving
> >*@example.com                           nobody
> 
> The above is incorrect as there is still a processing overhead.  I 
> suggest using:
> 
> @example.com                           error:nouser User unknown
> 
	Can't do that as much as I'd like to. Mail comes through
an MX. The MX just passes it along. When the final machine errors
it out, the MX is stuck with trying to get rid of it. The postmaster
also ends up getting a copy of the emails (Yes, I could turn that off,
but for the number of times its pointed out potential hacks, system
issues, etc, I'd rather not. ).

			Tuc