I also use postini and it works really well for my current needs.
<rant>I had experience with Barracuda as outbound anti-spam filters for a very large hosting provider and I won't use Barracuda again. Some of their methods for blocking spam are a tad extreme. At one point they decided to block both yahoo.com and google.com in their domain filters because neither company responded timely to their complaint emails and wanted their attention...not to mention their buggy 'spam engine' that died many times causing mail to error with 'failure to connect to 127.0.0.1'... I especially loved their tier 1's response of how the issue is on the recipients end because they couldn't telnet to mail.domain.com from their workstation...I had to first explain how mail.domain.com wasn’t the MX record for domain.com (it ironically was a postini MX record) and that it was obvious when thousands of messages sit in the inbound queue saying 'failure to connect to 127.0.0.1' meant their engine died and their 'watchdog' process failed to restart it. To me their Tier 1 unable to do the basics was pretty unacceptable.
</rant>
I wonder if there's a filter for top-postings in list that have a
bottom-posting rule?
This thread is very operationally interesting to me but I've lost the
plot
PS: I know that some devices actually prevent bottom-posting by default.
Workarounds are possible and are evident in other recent posts to this
list.
Additionally, may I suggest you file a bug report with your vendors or
switch to a device that you can control properly
I wonder if there's a filter for top-postings in list that have a
bottom-posting rule?
This thread is very operationally interesting to me but I've lost the
plot
PS: I know that some devices actually prevent bottom-posting by default.
Workarounds are possible and are evident in other recent posts to this
list.
Additionally, may I suggest you file a bug report with your vendors or
switch to a device that you can control properly
It makes the thread very hard to follow.
Why not?
Please don't top post!
I used to have this available for a 'signature', but, with a few exceptions, it seems to fall on blind eyes these days.<sigh>
Those both have pretty poor reputations for handling outgoing spam and other abuse issues.
Yahoo is notorious for the "the message in your complaint did not come from our servers" response, when any idiot who can read headers can see that it clearly did come from their servers. They've gone a step beyond this recently by refusing to accept spam complaints to abuse@yahoo.com unless they're in ARF format. That raises the bar high enough that unless you have the skills to easily turn yahoo spam into ARF-compliant reports, you can no longer send them complaints when you receive spam from their servers.
Google (gmail.com) is the only free-mail provider I'm aware of that hides the spammer's originating IP. All sorts of abuses seem to be tolerated there for much longer spans of time than you'd think it would take "the brightest of the brightest" to lock things down. i.e. URL redirectors used by spammers for months, phishing collectors reported to Google security, and nothing apparently done about them.
Sometimes, the only way to get an appropriate reaction from an org that just doesn't seem to care about its abuse issues is to make those abuse issues cause them some pain.
I don't think they had blocked mail coming/going from yahoo.com/google.com which would have been more careless to their subscribers (especially when our outbound units were processing a few million emails a day from our customers). They blocked the domains so you couldn't have a link to google/yahoo in the body and then set that as an update for all of their devices. I believe it was something about a URL redirect on each site that spammers were using..but this was a several years ago so I don't recall exactly.
