I know this could add delay on a very busy system. But as of late I have
been battling backscatter to legitimate users on my system. 99% of it seems to be originating from these domains, Ru Uk Br It Has anyone used this as a method to fight backscatter? I have read http://www.postfix.org/BACKSCATTER_README.html and have it deployed just as an FYI. It seems since Friday of last week I have seen a big increase of this. -- |
Elijah Savage:
> I know this could add delay on a very busy system. But as of > late I have been battling backscatter to legitimate users on > my system. 99% of it seems to be originating from these > domains, Ru Uk Br It > > Has anyone used this as a method to fight backscatter? Do you mean use SAV to fight backscatter? Wouldn't you just be creating more backscatter? See: http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts -- Sahil Tandon -------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not intend to waive confidentiality or privilege. Use of this email is prohibited when received in error. |
In reply to this post by Elijah Savage
Elijah Savage schrieb:
> I know this could add delay on a very busy system. But as of late I have > been battling backscatter to legitimate users on my system. 99% of it seems > to be originating from these domains, > Ru > Uk > Br > It > > Has anyone used this as a method to fight backscatter? > Maybe I got you wrong but afaik most backscatter arrives with the null sender address <>. How would you 'verify' these? |
In reply to this post by Elijah Savage
Elijah Savage wrote:
> I know this could add delay on a very busy system. But as of late I have > been battling backscatter to legitimate users on my system. 99% of it seems > to be originating from these domains, > Ru > Uk > Br > It > > Has anyone used this as a method to fight backscatter? > > I have read http://www.postfix.org/BACKSCATTER_README.html and have it > deployed just as an FYI. > > It seems since Friday of last week I have seen a big increase of this. > SAV will not block backscatter. bounces generally come from valid addresses. Things you can do - Implement the recommendations described in BACKSCATTER README - use spamassassin vbounce rules - use the last amavsid-new anti backscatter features - reject bounces from some places. you can use backscatterer.org DNSBL (only for bounces. use check_sender_access to trigger the call). - a "lose" heuristic consists of rejecting bounces if the PTR or helo match a set of patterns: (virus|scan|barra|cuda|filter|hole|fire|wall|fallback|bounce|junk|arrest|queue) but I have no idea whether this would block "wanted" bounces. if you still have problems, consider blocking bounces to victim recipients during the backscatter storm. |
In reply to this post by Tandon, Sahil (IM)
> Do you mean use SAV to fight backscatter? Wouldn't you just be creating > more backscatter? See: > > http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts > > -- > Sahil Tandon Thank you for the read. I had considered this, not to mention a lot of admins are turning off the vrfy because of this. Backscatter is just becoming so annoying :) -- |
In reply to this post by mouss-2
> SAV will not block backscatter. bounces generally come from valid addresses. > > Things you can do > - Implement the recommendations described in BACKSCATTER README > - use spamassassin vbounce rules > - use the last amavsid-new anti backscatter features > - reject bounces from some places. you can use backscatterer.org DNSBL > (only for bounces. use check_sender_access to trigger the call). > > - a "lose" heuristic consists of rejecting bounces if the PTR or helo > match a set of patterns: > > ) > but I have no idea whether this would block "wanted" bounces. > > > if you still have problems, consider blocking bounces to victim > recipients during the backscatter storm. Thank you. I have the SA vbounce rules setup. I will look into backscatter.org. -- |
Elijah Savage wrote:
> >> SAV will not block backscatter. bounces generally come from valid addresses. >> >> Things you can do >> - Implement the recommendations described in BACKSCATTER README >> - use spamassassin vbounce rules >> - use the last amavsid-new anti backscatter features >> - reject bounces from some places. you can use backscatterer.org DNSBL >> (only for bounces. use check_sender_access to trigger the call). >> >> - a "lose" heuristic consists of rejecting bounces if the PTR or helo >> match a set of patterns: >> >> >> > (virus|scan|barra|cuda|filter|hole|fire|wall|fallback|bounce|junk|arrest|queue> > ) > >> but I have no idea whether this would block "wanted" bounces. >> >> >> if you still have problems, consider blocking bounces to victim >> recipients during the backscatter storm. >> > > Thank you. > > I have the SA vbounce rules setup. I will look into backscatter.org. > note that it's backscatterer (with an additionnal "er" at the end). once again, only use for bounces (null sender, and maybe also mailer-daemon@ as some funny sites use a non null address). |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |