[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Everyone Greylists Except Honeypots ... So Let's Not Spam Honeypots!

2007-12-05 11:31:53

--On Wednesday, 05 December, 2007 17:30 +0000 Sabahattin
Gucukoglu <mail(_at_)sabahattin-gucukoglu(_dot_)com> wrote:

Does this notion bother anyone, in particular?

The argument for greylisting is apparently no longer - and if
it is, it  can't be for *much* longer - that, "So what if we
can't detect non-MTSs  anymore?  We can still trap the bad
ones by letting our favourite non- greylisting BL spamtraps
capture them!"

So all Mr. Bad Guy needs to do now is realise the significant
uptake of  greylisting for this one purpose, and never spam
any host that seems to  accept all initial transactions.  They
can do this simply by not entering  the DATA state.  And if
that's used as metric, by sharing data amongst  themselves as
to the exact purpose of non-greylisting hosts.

Any thoughts?


First, your subject line appears to be wrong to me: "everyone"
other than honeypots do not greylist.

Second, if I correctly understand what you are proposing above
(and it is possible that I do not), why do you believe that the
spammers will cooperate in behaving the way you want/ expect?
They have about zero incentive to go to extra effort to not send
mail to particular addresses unless doing so will net them a
_huge_ (think severals orders of magnitude) increase in the
number of messages that get delivered.