Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] anti-spam

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Steven Champeon <schampeo AT hesketh.com>
  • To: InterNetWorkers <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] anti-spam
  • Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:06:10 -0400

on Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 10:58:04AM -0400, David Minton wrote:
> On 6/12/03 2:31 PM, "Steven Champeon" <schampeo AT hesketh.com> wrote:
>
> > 4) sendmail rulesets - started bouncing all mail sent direct from a
> > dialup,
> > cable modem, or DSL line using 100+ different patterns.
>
> I've been considering doing this as well. What is everyone's opinion on
> blocking incoming mail from dynamic IP ranges? There are probably
> Internetworkers running mail servers at home off residential class broadband
> access. Is it reasonable to bounce your mail in an effort to reduce SPAM
> hitting my mailbox?

Some shaky stats, from one of our servers:

Today, so far: 40 out of 61 rejected messages came from dynamic IPs.
This week: 1437 of 5832 rejected messages came from dynamic IPs.

So far, we've had two complaints from people whose mail was blocked. The
reason the today numbers are 66% of total is that I've been adding more
rulesets over the past few days. Still, blocking between 25% and 66% of
spam is worth it to me. If you want to run a mail server on your cable
or DSL line, I should think it'd be worth getting the rDNS fixed so it
doesn't look like a cable or DSL line.

--
hesketh.com/inc. v: (919) 834-2552 f: (919) 834-2554 w: http://hesketh.com
Book publishing is second only to furniture delivery in slowness. -b. schneier




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page