I'm sorry if you took my response personally; I was merely trying to point out the problems inherrent in this kind of solution. Why? Because the way to implement your request is in exim.conf. And currently I'm maintaining DirectAdmin's exim.conf file.With all due respect Jeff, I am making a request for a feature. I have no desire to write one as I am not in the business of writing plugins.
I'm not so sure. For example I don't think you understood what I mean by a form response and why it creates a problem.It is the choice of the client to use it. Many have requested it and generally understand how it works.
We use a combination of SpamBlocker, SpamAssassin, and DirectAdmin Spam Filters. All come with DirectAdmin.This is interesting and I can understand the risk of challenge-response and I agree to Jeff completely. So, what would be the best spam filter then?
They use a lot of custom stuff they've written themselves, but basically it's a combination of blocklists (often their own), and the same techniques as used in SpamAssassin.What do big companies like Google or Yahoo use for their spam filter?
Please explain.Also, what if BoxTrapper is implemented with IP counter or DNS lookup so the forgery related error can be significantly minimized? Just a thought.
We can do the same with BoxTrapper. I can see that it can be quite laborious to build something like this. I hope someone will come up with it one day.And how would an IP Counter or a DNS lookup tell you if it's a forgery or not, given that according to RFCs anyone can use his gmail or hotmail address when writing from his home, office, or internet café system?
This problem is why we've removed all those specific sender checks for hotmail, gmail, yahoo, return addresses, from SpamBlocker.