[Greylist-users] Another idea for greylisting (fwd)

[Scott Nelson]

Presumably at some time in the past, David F. Skoll wrote;
>
>I had another idea for graylisting; I posted it on comp.mail.misc.  Here's
>a copy for you to think about.
>
>Regards,
>
>David.
>
>Bob O`Bob wrote:
>
>>> unavailable addresses. Do you think this is true? Will spammers hold
>>> failed delivery attempts and retry after a few hours?
>
>> They most certainly will.  Within a few months, anyway.
>
>But as someone else mentioned, widespread use of gray-listing has the
>benefit of giving eveyone an hour to detect a mass-mailing.  Why not modify
>the scheme as follows:
>
>The very *first* time you see a new "relationship", do the tempfail after
>the end of the DATA phase, and then you have the mail to inspect.  You
>can then send it to DCC, Razor, etc.
>
>For the next hour, you tempfail on the RCPT command (because you already have
>the mail body), and after that you allow processing.
>
>This gives Razor, DCC, etc. a one-hour headstart before anyone actually
>gets any mail.
>

I think it would have very little effect, since most spam traps will 
accept the email without delay and report it anyway.

On the other hand, I don't see any significant problems either.


Scott Nelson <scott at spamwolf.com>