Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 05:09:02 +0000 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu Subject: Re: spamassassin not lethal anymore Message-ID: <20170113050902.937e8e721168218c24cfc0d6@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <34435.128.135.52.6.1484263940.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> References: <mailman.128.1484222402.46410.freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> <23452361f18e06fccb64293d30f1b6eb.squirrel@webmail.harte-lyne.ca> <34435.128.135.52.6.1484263940.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 17:32:20 -0600 (CST) "Valeri Galtsev" <galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > Question: why spammers would go to your lower priority MX instead of first > going to your primary MX? Is that because on primary and only on primary > you have greylisting? Why not to have greylisting on all MX serving your > domain then? I'm in darkness about the logic behind doing it. Many botnet spammers assume that the primary MX has the best anti-spam measures and by going through a secondary they can bypass them. So having a secondary that rejects (preferably unless the primary is down) traps these spammers. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170113050902.937e8e721168218c24cfc0d6>