Spam bounce

Hi Guys,
sometimes my mailboxes where bombed by some fags i know. Now, i want to
bounce theese mails back like:

if mail from spam@spamhost.com then forward to ceo@spamhost.com

I couldn't find something in the postfix documentation. In sender_access or
client_access i think i cannot do this. In virtual is only the receipient
address checked.

Can anyone help?

Kind regards
Martin

--
Why is it that we rejoice at a birth and grieve at a funeral? It is because
we
are not the person involved.
-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"

Martin Treide-Heuser wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> sometimes my mailboxes where bombed by some fags i know. Now, i want to
> bounce theese mails back like:
>
That's a very bad idea for several reasons:

- it lets the spammer know he reached a valid address that he can sell
- it doubles the amount of spam-related traffic
- the 'From" address is probably forged

Use spamassassin to recognize spam and configure Postfix to silently
throw it in a bit-bucket.



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

In article <f2smbt$5mt$1@news01.versatel.de>, Martin Treide-Heuser wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> sometimes my mailboxes where bombed by some fags i know. Now, i want to
> bounce theese mails back like:
>
> if mail from spam@spamhost.com then forward to ceo@spamhost.com

In general, that's a really bad idea. In certain special
cases, procmail(1) is your friend.


in .forward,

| procmail


In .procmailrc,

:0
* ^From: spam@spamhost.com
! ceo@spamhost.com

:0:
/your/mailbox/file


In general, just reject it. Ceo@spamhost doesn't care.
He might even be the same guy.


In main.cf:

smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks
check_sender_access = hash:moonbats
...

In moonbats:
spam@spamhost.com REJECT get a life you moonbat


In Makefile:
moonbats.db : moonbats
postmap hash:moonbats


Cameron

Martin Gregorie wrote:

> That's a very bad idea for several reasons:

In general, yes. But sometimes i got penetrant spam (100 and more) from one
spammer. In theese cases i search for the spammer and/or the shop which
profits from the spam and bombard it.

Regards Martin

--
Truth is the most valuable thing we have -- so let us economize it.
-- Mark Twain

Cameron L. Spitzer wrote:

> In general, that's a really bad idea. In certain special
> cases, procmail(1) is your friend.

Thanks, it is for special cases only of course.

Kind regards Martin
--
The fashion wears out more apparel than the man.
-- William Shakespeare, "Much Ado About Nothing"

Martin Treide-Heuser wrote:
> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>
>> That's a very bad idea for several reasons:
>
> In general, yes. But sometimes i got penetrant spam (100 and more) from one
> spammer. In theese cases i search for the spammer and/or the shop which
> profits from the spam and bombard it.
>
Searching for the beneficiary and/or the people that paid the spammer is
a good idea, but there we disagree. I'd report them to the relevant
authorities rather than bombarding them: the police should be interested
for a number of reasons ranging from inciting spam (and following the
cash trail to the spammers) to the likelihood of catching people selling
counterfeit goods.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |