Re: [Fwd: Re: Spamassasin over RBL, was Re: rblsmtpd -t?]
On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 07:48:06PM +1000, Jason Lim wrote:
> > > 1. is the site an open relay?
> >
> > Most people here agree on this, but you'll still see some debate,
> > particularly about the distinction between relays that are merely
> > open and relays that have been actively abused. Some people think
> > that we shouldn't block an open relay until it's spammed us.
>
> I believe in "innocent until proven guilty". But thats me.
failing an open relay test IS proof of "guilt".
> And I also believe in it, because it is very possible that one of the
> tests to determine if it is an open-relay is braindead... what if I
> made a mail server that pretends it will relay email, but in fact does
> not, and actually records the IP that tried to abuse the open relay
> and reports it to the admins (i consider that very whitehat)?
then it's NOT an open relay. failing an open relay test requires that
the mail server actually relay the mail to the destination address.
simply accepting the message is not enough - it has to be delivered.
please stop demonstrating your difficulty with the bleeding obvious.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
Fabricati Diem, PVNC.
-- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: