From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F9CF138350 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 19:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA294E1001; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 19:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ed1-f67.google.com (mail-ed1-f67.google.com [209.85.208.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54234E0F70 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 19:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-f67.google.com with SMTP id w26so857657edu.7 for ; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 12:04:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=wcC2GCmFJ89xLcVVnw6yIFpLAFWptd774hdlp1dK6OQ=; b=c4+AQhEHZ8s+ZGkzYVgYNuH7sQ3xFEdUzylrX9rQOIpMWxuYhdpoZ6mwf88v9d/r0K 1WgKCHLICm2+9f1Ex5/jT6KlnILHsdS2V4oIOYGR8j5Rq7ufXCb4lMdR/h5LRXcJMPpm F/g4hFjRPzUJRuunSmlgl3l7Xg0KUGHD817mUsdrj1GHUoWkFLd1km/uxjTb7OxJ4MC8 AfqYf1v1DVar8GqMjKA8ZFkA5UnM9X0xMkuI49JDnv9jsP4pZnIxFMaHUhuVw5/0u+Zy wMEHqdTybA53j05ihdS7RZ6Pw8WWdaAh6YV9Oy5Gii6EG+NBsDUdX0vHlkJ3GzEusuuT 4J9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaIe5AFm0T9ROzTWRKrW63DaPY16aNy9InrmILd5We/Bc2mpSkE cX5lWFkmT+8NDFZDFZdEItQaFR9Ie5Irku80TxkrHIF5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKvvGgJ/tBA9lWfqypgdMAgz8+Hgo+B/feFQJ/MlBDPO/vyZ1YqgRz6P066jJcSmlly4vK32xsZVzg0sw7Qkzo= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:8310:: with SMTP id j16mr870514ejx.247.1586199841603; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 12:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200406123504.fkcuaiiahsemympv@ad-gentoo-main> <20200406130812.n4zgquadlgkggi7u@ad-gentoo-main> <8495c9e0-269a-eb83-48d4-15af57adb5ca@gentoo.org> <20200406132427.yde3oxwqtrgwehec@ad-gentoo-main> <20200406161810.522yilumzsl6rvuc@matica> In-Reply-To: <20200406161810.522yilumzsl6rvuc@matica> From: Rich Freeman Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 15:03:47 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Alternate Incoming Mail Server To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 8fcb93d1-eabf-417e-a6d8-3b98fddd3c20 X-Archives-Hash: e80ea6561f8a28e776f6634fed00cc7b On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 12:18 PM Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > On 2020-04-06 14:24, Ashley Dixon wrote: > > > Cheers for the help ! To be honest, I don't think I'd want to receive > > e-mail from someone who cannot resist pressing a button :) > > In fact, "MTAs" that don't retry turn out to be spam robots on close > inspection, more often than not. That is the basis for the spam > fighting tactic called "greylisting". So you will not even be original > in ignoring them. > More often than not, yes. The main exception I've seen are sites that email you verification codes, such as some sorts of "two-factor" implementations (whether these are really two-factor I'll set aside for now). Many of these services will retry, but some just give up after one attempt. Solutions like postgrey make it easy to whitelist particular MTAs or destination addresses to avoid this problem. I won't say that greylisting has solved all my spam problems but it definitely cuts down on it. Also, by delaying never-before-seen MTAs it also makes it more likely that RBLs and such will be updated before the email makes it past greylisting, which will cut down on "zero day" spam. -- Rich