[ILUG] Spam and more spam

[John Allen]

kevin lyda wrote:

>On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:02:10PM +0000, Philip Reynolds wrote:
>  
>
>>Consider an ever increasing volume of mail from time X to time Y.
>>Under normal circumstances, Postfix simply accepts the mail and
>>stores it in the queue. Processing is done *AFTER* postfix has
>>safely accepted the mail, written to disk and the remote client has
>>safely disconnected. This is the most common way it is done, because
>>it is the proper way to do it. Postfix doesn't take up much CPU
>>time, simply accepting a message, so even if it has trouble scanning
>>all messages, they are accepted and acknowledged as being accepted
>>to the remote server.
>>    
>>
>
>no, i don't agree with this.  "the proper way to do it"  feh.  every mta
>has begun putting in some checks at receive time.  sendmail can do dnsrbl,
>message size and valid hostname checks pretty much out of the box -
>and has been able to do so for years.
>  
>
Well actually Postfix can be configured to do a shitload of checks 
before accepting the message,
including but not limited to RBLs, non existent domains etc...

>i would argue that the main problem with sa (and its cousins) is that
>it has been deployed post message acceptance.  conceptually rejecting a
>message due to message content is no different then rejecting it due to
>message size - and yet you argue that they should be done at different
>times.
>
Well only after a mail has passed Postfix's checks will it be passed to 
other checking tools.