A recent discussion somewhere on the net mentioned that milter-greylist doesn't greylist if a sender's SPF information validates. I looked at the archives here and there's some mention of the topic, but it doesn't go far enough. <p> This isn't such a good idea - the problem is that spammers are increasingly publishing SPF records for their domains. (And a clever spammer could advertise ip4:0.0.0.0/0 as his address block, and SPF would always pass, without giving out any useful information for blacklist-managers to blacklist.) <p> It still can make sense to check SPF records, since you shouldn't whitelist messages if the SPF rejects a message. Some people have commented that rejecting messages that fail SPF isn't milter-greylist's job, and it's probably not - I know sites that use SPF as "yet another SpamAssassin weighting factor" rather than outright rejection, though it could be argued than if you're checking it here anyway, might as well do the rejection here if you're planning to reject it for everybody anyway. (On the other hand, if you've already SPF-checked the sender before checking the greylist, there's obviously no point...)
Message
SPF and Greylisting
2005-01-15 by billstewart2002a
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.