Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:07:01 -0800
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        Eric Crist <mnslinky@gmail.com>
Cc:        girishvenkatachalam@gmail.com, Jorn Argelo <jorn@wcborstel.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: (postfix) SPAM filter?
Message-ID:  <66EF345A-B011-4344-876A-758B9C1FE5B5@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <A6EAB1D6-CB49-4008-899D-51078181C4C4@gmail.com>
References:  <20071216185050.GB26535@brahma.susmita.org> <9cc0a3fa1d403f16f4fc9b2abb49fb75@mail.wcborstel.com> <A6EAB1D6-CB49-4008-899D-51078181C4C4@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 17, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Eric Crist wrote:
> I hear a lot of people saying that greylisting doesn't work, when I  
> have actual numbers for my network proving it does.  These numbers  
> are from the first week of May 2007 to today:
>
> Greylisted/Rejected Messages:	187560
> Spam Tagged Messages:		  3806
> Virus Tagged Messages:		     0
> Bounced Messages:		     7
>
> Total Messages Sent:		   761
> Total Messages Delivered:	 25345

I'd second the recommendation, although my stats don't keep long-term  
track of the difference between something greylisted and something  
bounced due to policy-weightd.  Over the past year, I've had:

Rejected Messages:	1,624,353
Spam Tagged Messages:	39,633
Virus Tagged Messages:	2947
Bounced Messages:	7609

Total sent:		103,433
Total received:		122,614

About 93% of the incoming traffic gets rejected permanently (via  
policy-weightd) or temporarily via greylisting; of the remainder,  
about 40% is tagged as spam and about 3% is tagged as viral.

-- 
-Chuck




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?66EF345A-B011-4344-876A-758B9C1FE5B5>