[Mailman-Users] specific (1) LHS and (2) sender rules to frustrate spam/phishing

[Rich Kulawiec]

Mark, John -- reading both your messages (and applying significantly more
coffee) has induced enlightenment.  Yep, this is just not going to work
the way I'd suggested.  Bad me.  No biscuit.

So let me modify these as follows and see if this is any better:

> (1) LHS (left-hand-side) rules

Present to list-owner for disposition as done today, but mark it
prominently as "noreply address, almost certainly a forgery".

> (2) sender rules

Present to list-owner for disposition as done today, but mark it
prominently as "probable phish".

Granted, in both cases, the message still has be to processed, but
perhaps marking it (both on the "Subject" line and inside the
message body) will make it easier/faster for list-owners to deal with.

---Rsk

p.s. As as aside, I strongly recommend against callbacks/SAV.  It's
inherently abusive, it's a deliberate attempt to bypass site security
policies [and thus illegal in some jurisdictions, but ask your attorney
for clarification 'cause IANAL], it provides a spam support service, and
-- as we've already seen -- it can be used to conduct quite effective
DoS/DDoS attacks.  And on top of that, far more effective, efficient,
and difficult-to-abuse anti-spam methods exist.  I'm working [yeah,
alright, for some values of "work"] on a "stupid anti-spam techniques"
FAQ that will cover this in considerably more depth, so I don't intend
this to be by any means a full explanation.  However, this topic has been
repeatedly discussed on Spam-L in depth, so I'll refer anyone interested
to that list's archives until I can manage to get that FAQ cranked out.