3 ms·
May want to throw postgrey in a mix. Incredulously, asking first-time senders to retry in a bit still filters out the vast majority of spam.
by eps 10y ago
May want to throw postgrey in a mix.
Incredulously, asking first-time senders to retry in a bit still filters out the vast majority of spam.
- insertnickname 10y agoI intend to switch to rspamd soon, which has built-in greylisting. However, in my test run with rspamd I did not get good enough results because my current SpamAssassin setup relies heavily on rejecting spam that hits two or more content filters (bayes, pyzor, etc.). I will need to implement at least a pyzor plugin for rspamd before I can switch. rspamd, in addition to bayes filtering, has it's own fuzzy fingerprinting system. You can use your own fingerprint db and/or a public one. The public one that is configured in rspamd by default didn't seem to catch any of the spam I get though.
- eps 10y agoDon't know about rspamd, but SpamAssassin used to be way too aggressive in its stock config. E.g., it had a default rule for some "MS-Outlook" headers that just happen to be in every email sent from Outlook via a non-Exchnage mail server. That created a ton of false positives - wasn't hard to fix, but still it was a hassle.
- garaetjjte 10y agoDon't do it. There is no reason why mail cannot be instant.
- insertnickname 10y agoAlso, greylisting has become less effective for stoppping spam.
- jrnichols 10y agoI ended up moving away from Postgrey because the delays (especially coming from Gmail) were a huge problem. Since the mail would come from some random IP in Google's massive server farm, each time it tried to get delivered, postgrey would delay it again.
- insertnickname 10y agoIn rspamd you can configure it so that it only greylists mails that it classifies as spam, but don't have a high enough score to reject it.