The rDNS is not intended to block spams per se but to keep them from
being hidden as the article quoted in the original post discussed. I
didn't mean to reopen the rDNS debate at all. I meant merely to state
spammers who 'hide' from traceroute and whois (as that article
discussed) can't do so when an rDNS done during SMTP at the mail server
level. That should make this ploy of being 'invisible' to those methods
of spammer discovery essentially useless, if I'm reading that article
correctly.
Original article:
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-10/msg00438.html On Feb 26, 2004, at 1:25 AM, Eugene Morozov wrote:
> codger <lists@pmbx.net> writes:
>
>> For some time there has been a setting in CommunIGate Pro to only
>> accept domains that have proper rDNS entries so that the mail server
>> MUST verfy a real rDNS at the SMTP level. That's the only thing that I
>> can see that will stop invisible domains.
>
> Hello,
> This was discussed several times, for example, in
> Russian newsgroups. It was concluded that rejecting
> domains without rDNS entries will block some spam, but
> it will also cause too many false positives.
> Eugene
>
> --
> Spammers, send me mail here: kaede.news@online.ru, akrosum@yahoo.com
>
>
Kindest regards,
Ron
"What shall we do? What shall we do?" he cried, "Escaping goblins to be
caught by wolves!" - Bilbo Baggins
The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkein
http://www.apple.com/trailers/newline/returnoftheking/trailer_large.html