Ask Slashdot: Is Reverse DNS a Worthy Standard For Fighting Spam?

Posted by timothy on Thursday October 13, 2011 @05:11AM from the who-the-heck-are-you? dept.

drmartin66 makes it to the front page with this question: "Last weekend I installed a new spam filter server for a client, and enabled connection rejection if the sending server did not have a Reverse DNS record. Since then, I have had a number of emails rejected from regulator bodies that do not have a Reverse DNS record, and are refusing to have one created for their email server. What is your opinion of Reverse DNS records? Are they (or should they be) a standard, and required? Or are they useless for spam fighting?"

2 of 301 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Better Question... by alfredos · 2011-10-13 05:22 · Score: 1, Troll

Incompetence.
Re:rDNS by SmurfButcher+Bob · 2011-10-13 05:48 · Score: 1, Troll

Yep, rDNS works really well until your DNS goes tits up, or until MY DNS goes tits up, or until Pakistan accidentally BGPs something that makes you unable to resolve the query... again.
If the email you receive is anecdotal crap, it won't be a big deal. If the email you receive is of merit, then this test makes an unreliable protocol even worse.

--

help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am