If spam is the problem, a better mail server can be the solution. Running your own mail server isn't nearly as complicated as it used to be. QmailToaster (http://wiki.qmailtoaster.com) with spamdyke is a very good combination. Spamdyke rejects 90+% of spam without even receiving (or scanning) the message. The sanesecurity extensions to clamav catch the lion's share of phishing attempts. With this setup, I get <1 spam per day. Disclaimer: I'm presently the project lead for QmailToaster. -- -Eric 'shubes' On 11/09/2012 12:40 PM, Derek Trotter wrote: > I don't remember the url, but a few years ago I found a site that had an > interesting idea to fight those who try to con people into handing over > account information. If you got one of these scam emaills, you would > submit the url the phishers included. Their system would generate > random strings of text and submit these to the phishing site over and > over again. The result being the phishers would have lots of bogus > account data and would waste their time trying it. > > On 11/09/2012 08:51 AM, Carruth, Rusty wrote: >> As I remember (but remember whose memory we are talking about :-) - >> >> I had 3 lists - those known to be spammers, those known to be ok, and >> anybody else. (Ok, so the 'anybody else' wasn't actually a LIST, it was >> anybody not in the first 2 lists) >> >> Known spammers got some huge delay (I think I finally ended up with 24 >> hours!), known safe senders got zero delay, and unknown got a few >> seconds (or maybe I made it zero, I don't remember). >> >> So non spammers got either zero or minimal delay. >> >> If I can remember, I'll see if I still have that config file somewhere, >> cause now you got me curious! >> >> I should mention that there IS one 'small' downside - if you get ALL >> your internet sockets tied up with spammers then you cannot receive (or >> send) email (or do anything else network-related until one of the >> sockets frees up). I don't think I ever hit that limit, but then I only >> do email for my family... >> >> Rusty >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> Rusty, how did tarpit and that delay time effect non spam users? >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Carruth, Rusty >>> wrote: >>>> .... >>>> >>>> I've tried running that thing that keeps spammers busy trying to >>> deliver the email (tarpit? I cannot remember - the idea is you keep >>> telling unknown MTAs 'hold on a moment' for a while - say an hour or >>> more, thus keeping their delivery rate low. I should mention that at >>> home I run my own MTA, so it was an option for me. Anybody using >> their >>> ISP's MTA (or gmail, or...) cannot do this). The problem is that you >>> need a LOT of people running that for it to do much good in spam >>> reduction overall, and I don't' know if it reduced mine (but it was >>> satisfying to look at the headers and see that couple of hour delay). >>> ... >> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list -PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >> > > > --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss