Re: [exim] Anti SPAM Exim configuration

On 12/14/2004 16:04, "Marc Perkel" <marc@???> wrote:

> spamhaus has been good to me. No complaints.

Same here, generally.

Either we had a glitch earlier today which produced false spamhaus listing
DNS answers, or spamhaus briefly listed a bunch of white hats. I've never
had in a month as many block exemption requests for spamhaus blocks as I got
today. (Upon return from a medical appointment which was part followup to
the collapse-in-restaurant; ride in Aid Car; ER; overnight stay with 3 units
blood poured in adventure of last Monday.)

I tend to think they listed some white hats briefly...in the case of one of
the IPs, one of our servers thought it was OK and the other thought Spamhaus
had blocked it, which implies to me a caching of the block on the latter
server. Many of the others showed no spamhaus listing when I checked by
hand.

This problem had its good side...some of the reported servers should already
have been whitelisted past the spamhaus test just for reasons of trust and
volume. They are now.

Spamhaus and a local list we maintain in MySQL sit "in front of" our
greylisting. [The greylisting is running smoothly, and has whitelisting for
the trusted servers which send us high volumes...removing the impact on
those sending operations. It also has whitelisting for creatures like Yahoo
Groups, which don't do greylisting (Yahoo Groups diverts rejected mail to
the user's web interface). We can whitelist as finely as "this sender to
this recipient" or as coarsely as this /24 subnet. And our greylist daemon
whitelists automatically if SPF matches up and the sending domain is in a
trusted list.]

--John