from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B3D16F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:09:39 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 12 Sep 2002 21:09:39 +0100 (IST)
from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net
    [216.136.171.252]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id
    g8CIqkC11377 for <jm-sa@jmason.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:52:46 +0100
from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13]
    helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with
    esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17pZ3T-0004Ps-00; Thu,
    12 Sep 2002 11:51:07 -0700
from smtpzilla1.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.137]) by
    usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id
    17pZ2z-0006sq-00 for <spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>;
    Thu, 12 Sep 2002 11:50:37 -0700
from airplant.xs4all.nl (airplant.xs4all.nl [194.109.242.172])
    by smtpzilla1.xs4all.nl (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g8CIoVlk032173 for
    <spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:50:32 +0200
    (CEST)
from [192.168.1.104] (ink.xs4all.nl [194.109.194.16]) by
    airplant.xs4all.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955C91289D7 for
    <spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:50:30 +0200
    (CEST)
Re: [SAtalk] Reject, Blackhole, or Fake No-User
No, hits=-7.3 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,INVALID_MSGID,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,
	      QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03,USER_AGENT
	version=2.50-cvs
From spamassassin-talk-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Thu Sep 12 21:09:40 2002

Op 12-09-2002 00:35 schreef Ellen Clary (ellen@dgi.com):
>> Then there is a third possibility. Instead of returning a 550 code
>> indicating you're on to the spammer, fake a 5.1.1 response which is
>> saying "mailbox does not exist." This would be in the hopes that some
>> spammers out there actually remove names reported as non-existent from
>> their lists. I know, a slim hope, but even if only a few do, it can
>> lower the incidence.
>
> They don't, I can guarantee that.  Quite a few spamtraps nowadays
> operate by 5nn'ing for 6 months in the hope of getting legit mailers
> to remove bouncing addrs from lists;  then after 6 months, they just
> spamtrap all incoming mail to those addrs.  (unfortunately a lot of
> legit mailers don't bother cleaning their lists either.)
Most spammers don't check reply codes at all, they just send out as many
mails as their system will hold without checking for any confirmation.
A trick to lower spam reception was dicussed on the postfix mailing list
some time ago: answer all incoming mail with a 4xx temporary error code when
it is offered the first time, and accept it the second time. Apparently most
mass-emailers don't even try to deliver a second time.
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
Spamassassin-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk