Rufan-Redi Posted September 12, 2004 Share Posted September 12, 2004 as an admin for a number of sites I have a whole bunch of forwards that eventually make their way (usually via a specific upstream address so I can quick redirect them) to my SpamCop address which is my main line of defence against drowning in spam.... I'd love to start using the MailHosts (especially as it's running the risk of actually becoming mandatory one day) but... the risk factor is a bit high ! Would love to see a totally automated solution for adding mailhosts, but, yeah... right.... computers can't deduce the right answer to this question, so... perhaps a check list that's been monitoring hosts and if you manually (via webmail as well) report one as spam it gets dropped, but you can also go into the list and manually select which ones are good for you. I get a little nervous about making something like this mandatory without a low pain adoption route.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted September 12, 2004 Share Posted September 12, 2004 I'd love to start using the MailHosts (especially as it's running the risk of actually becoming mandatory one day) but... the risk factor is a bit high !You can always do the test and if you don't like the results simply delete all of the created mailhosts and you will be back where you started, (just do not submit any reports until you are satisifed) so I have a hard time understanding what the high risk factor is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufan-Redi Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 You can always do the test and if you don't like the results simply delete all of the created mailhosts and you will be back where you started, (just do not submit any reports until you are satisifed) so I have a hard time understanding what the high risk factor is? 16932[/snapback] risk factor is not knowing the impact and/or consequences if I miss an account / client where mail is forwarded to my spamcop account and I report from webmail... If it's going to become mandatory then lets at least make sure there are tools in place to make it fool-proof (eg offer a check list of sites that are 'probably good', 'probably bad' and 'unsure' based on a users reporting history etc I'm firmly in favour of anything that makes reporting better, safer (and who knows, maybe more effective) but if it requires more effort on my part then I'll just pay my $30 and use the filtering/webmail and storage but my 8 hour reporting average may slip ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Consequences seen thus far basically boil down to the parser taking an early exit with the "this isn't in your mailhost configuration, so everything after is forged" and one of your (or hosting) IP addresses is identified as the injection point. If you follow the rules and verify the parsing results, you'll notice this, cancel the report, and fix your configuration. On the other hand, as an "admin of a number of sites" who "has a whole bunch of forwards" .... shouldn't you have a nice little list or map somewhere that shows all this data ... something that you could use as a checklist to see if all addresses have been "configured" in addition to ensuring that the "flow" is correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.