Re: Massive SPAM Increase {-2.6} {-2.6}

--On Monday, October 09, 2006 17:29:23 -0400 Tim 
<tim-forensics@sentinelchicken.org> wrote:

> > Its purpose is to reject *all* mail from bogus MTAs - dialups,
> > misconifigured servers, MTAs that aren't registered in the domains' DNS
> > as  a "legal" MX, MTAs that don't reverse properly, etc., etc.  If the
> > email is  forged in any way, it will never make it to DATA.
>
> That's great, except it makes the internet more expensive for the little
> guy.  If you're trying to run a non-spamming personal mailserver off of
> a consumer DSL or cable line, you can get screwed by others' policies
> like this because you may not have control over your PTR records or how
> your ISP lists you as a non-MTA with other organizations.
>
> Sure, argue that the little guy should just shell out for a better line,
> but if he could, he wouldn't be the little guy.
It wouldn't hurt to actually read how it works before criticizing it.

Policyd-weight (the name implies what it does) provides a weighted score to 
each "bad" thing an MTA does.  The *cumulative* score is what matters.  It 
also *subtracts* points for good things that an MTA does.  So, the 
situation you describe should not be a problem.

If you want to test that, send a test message to geek@stovebolt.com, and 
see if it gets rejected.  If it does, look at the headers to see what it 
did.

Paul Schmehl (pauls@utdallas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/

p7sT2L0YPeIuj.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature