[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian.org email forwarding

On Sat, 7 May 2005, martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> [2005.05.07.1403 +0200]:
> > Why are you so much worried about the envelope sender, when it is
> > usually forged? You are not trying to bounce messages that you
> > didn't want to receive back to the sender, are you? (that would be
> > bounce-spam).
> Well, sure. The point is that right now, my server rejects a lot of
> spam, so the bounces end up in my regular mailbox. I am effectively
> boune-spamming myself. So I'd rather have the bounce generated by
> master go elsewhere.

You should really accept messages from master before trying to reject
spam, i.e. use some kind of whitelist for master. If that's not possible,
don't forward email to such address.

What we would really need is some procedure in master to reduce the
level of spam we have to receive, in a way what it is either rejected
at SMTP time (using cbl.abuseat.org, for example), or simple vanished
because of lack of RFC 2821 compliance (greylisting).

I still hope that the Debian project (i.e. all of us) realize some day
about how stupid is to accept each and every message when we could
easily get rid of a large portion of spam with virtually no harm to

> > I'm more worried about "! my@address.net" rewriting the message body,
> You mean the payload? It rewrites the 822 header, but not the
> message body.

Oops, yes, I meant "message content", not message body.

> > so I usually do something like "formail -R Sender: X-Master-Sender:"
> > in master and then "formail -I Sender: -R X-Master-Sender: Sender:" on
> > the machine where I actually receive the message.
> okay, that's also an interesting solution, but it won't solve my
> problem: if the final recipient server rejects the message which
> procmail forwarded, I get the bounce.

Don't forward your email to a server that might bounce it back to
master, then, that would be really rude.

Reply to: