Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

security through obscurity, again?

obscurity security
0
Posted

security through obscurity, again?

0

I see that, in fine /. tradition, you didn’t RTFA. From the article: If we have never seen this triplet before, then refuse this delivery and any others that may come within a certain period of time with a temporary failure. (emphasis addded) Later in the article it goes into much more detail about the delay, how long to delay if the triplet has not been seen before, life time of the whitelist, etc. It also talks about configuring the times – they mention the default delay is 1 hour, but that their records suggest that 1 minute would have caught 99% of the same spam messages – “The data collected during testing showed that more than 99% of the mail that was blocked with the tested setting of 1 hour would still have been blocked with a delay setting of only 1 minute. At that point, having a larger initial delay will definitely help, as it gives time for other blocking methods to act. For this reason, it is suggested that at least a one hour delay value be kept as a default, since spamme

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123