mrmaxx Posted June 13, 2005 Posted June 13, 2005 I keep getting bounced email with my domain forged in the sender info, as well as "phishing" emails allegedly from "webmaster" and "postmaster" etc at my domain. My question is, if I were to put "[at]mydomain.com" in the personal blacklist, would it catch most or all of that junk? What is the likelihood of false-positives (I typically don't send THROUGH SpamCop so I don't think it's likely to get caught there...)
petzl Posted June 13, 2005 Posted June 13, 2005 I keep getting bounced email with my domain forged in the sender info, as well as "phishing" emails allegedly from "webmaster" and "postmaster" etc at my domain. My question is, if I were to put "[at]mydomain.com" in the personal blacklist, would it catch most or all of that junk? What is the likelihood of false-positives (I typically don't send THROUGH SpamCop so I don't think it's likely to get caught there...) 29180[/snapback] In SpamCop Email (the only email address you will ever need) you put in mydomain.com do not put in [at]mydomain.com In my whitelist I get a fair amount of email from TZ which generaly ends in TZ so by putting TZ in whitelist ALL "from" email addresses ending in TZ are passed I also do this with most Australian domain names like vagabond.com.au this lets a bit a spam through that would otherwise be blocked, but so far not a problem ( note do not use .TZ in white/blacklist) My Blacklist I have yahoo.com, hotmail.com but in whitelist put in FULL [at] address of people I know using these domains/email services For instance hard_[at]guess<AT>hotmail.com gets through but other [at]hotmail.com do not So far I get little spam if TZ becomes a problem C an easily remove it from Whitelist (Remember a whitelist overides ALL blacklists)
mrmaxx Posted June 13, 2005 Author Posted June 13, 2005 Thanks... I figured that would be fairly safe... I'll just have to keep a closer eye on my held mail for a few days to make sure nothing legit gets held. :-)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.