Authorized TO Emails |
Post Reply ![]() |
Author | |
HBr ![]() Guest Group ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 09 September 2003 at 8:28am |
I filled this whitelist and I was very surprised that this check is not made BEFORE any other. So, if somebody sends an spam email to nonexistent user and the email matches criterias to be quarantined, the email is placed to the quarantine and I have to handle it. I thing the check against authorized recipients should by made at the beginning of communication. Jan |
|
![]() |
|
w mohr ![]() Guest Group ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Actually, I prefer this behaviour (Spamcheck before usercheck). This
way a deadbeat will get caught and disallowed *before* they can
access my userlist (I don't want them obtaining any more info.
then they have to about my operation.) I've noticed of late that legit addresses in my care are being used
to send spam. Not from here mind you, but as the "spoof'd" return
address. I would rather can the spam first and authenicate users
later. Otherwise, a spammer now knows a legit address to use to
send spam.
|
|
![]() |
|
HBr ![]() Guest Group ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ok, you are right. I was quite surprised by the amount of invalid recipients in quarantine db. When I had no spamfilter, I didnt have to handle any invalid recipients - these werent accepted with a message "No such user here". Now, my quarantine db is full of invalid recipients and I have to handle them. Jan |
|
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
|
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.