Hey @Tutanota, that’s a great way to avoid spam! Is this system developed in-house? I would love to learn how it works. Do you use Postfix?
This might looks great until you realize that it breaks mail standards. We have status codes for mails, which include rejected (and this causes an mail to the original recipient with a message containing the reason).
Accepting the mail but not delivering it into a user accessible mailbox is a bad idea and breaks how email works, please don't do that :/
Use proper rejected status instead and provide a useful error message (which could also contain such a link).
@sheogorath ah, you’re right. I’m a postmaster myself and try to stick to standards as much as I can, and I cringe when other postmasters decide to violate standards openly. Yeah, the localhost mailer daemon can present the user with an error message from the server, right? This error message can contain such link.
I’m just looking for an effective solution because SpamAssassin doesn’t cut it anymore and some of my users are drowning in very obvious Nigerian prince spam...
Exactly.
Spamd seems to be quite efficent and you should try to make gmail addresses more likely spam.
https://microblog.shivering-isles.com/@sheogorath/101929271510129821
Finally I want to mention, that it's not the first time that @Tutanota is breaking mail standards. The refusal to use IMAP and SMTP for their users is also (from my perspective) a no-go and causes a very bad vendor-lock in, which is my main reason to not recommend them :/
@sheogorath yeah maybe I should tune my SpamAssassin scores to place more negative bias onto gmail addresses... I wanted to migrate to rspamd this summer though, but I’m not looking forward to it 😩 migrations are painful especially with downtime involved... maybe I could spin it up on a fresh server and just switch ports on the VLAN when everything is ready 🤔
