On 11/4/2004 7:42, "Alan J. Flavell" <a.flavell@???> wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Tore Anderson wrote:
>
>> Of course, the scenario John W.
>> Baxter is depicting isn't unlikely either: When greylisting is more
>> widely adopted, the technology dies - the spammers will have enough
>> incentive to bypass it (by doing each run twice, for instance).
>
> I thought one of the hopes of greylisting is that by the time you're
> ready to accept mail from a new sender, if they're an abuser there'll
> be a good chance that they spammed their way into blacklists while you
> were waiting?
I've seen that happen sometimes, but not often enough to matter. But
perhaps that's because we try only to use conservative dnsbls.
Not always conservative enough...the server sending mail for the local
multiple listing service got itself listed a couple of months ago.
--John
