Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 01:56:40PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:57:28AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Juha-Matti Tapio wrote:
> > > There is no valid reason whatsoever to send bounces for spam. If you have a
> >
> > What should happen when someone sends mail from a spam trap [yes, forged],
> > to a valid address, WITHOUT any spam content (or content not filtered as
> > spam, it is the same), and that valid address bounces because its inbox is
> > full?
>
> Such a delivery failure should be rejected with a temp. failure
> which would not generate a bounce to the forged address.
Not always true:
1. sender forges address and sends off e-mail
2. intermediary mailserver accepts mail and tries to deliver to destination
3. destination rejects with temp failure
4. intermediary tries a few more times, and eventually gives up
5. intermediary *generates bounce* to forged sender
Making the argument that there should never be bounces is silly.
Ward.
--
Pong.be -( "If you think penguins are fat and waddle, you have )-
Virtual hosting -( never been attacked by one running at you in excess of )-
http://pong.be -( 100 MPH." -- Linus )-
GnuPG public key: http://gpg.dtype.org
Reply to: