Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Andrew Miehs wrote:
> This argument seems to becoming a religious discussion regarding
> point 2.
Only for those who still think there is an easy answer. The scenario I
proposed had NO blind user forwarding. It involves a *perfectly valid*
email delivery, one that is not spam, but has been forged to come from a
spam trap. If you cannot see past the "quota full" reason, then I can give
you a pletora of others, such as IO error on the spool, resource starvation
on the spool machine, network problems internal to the ISP, and even a
completely sane, properly implemented "vacation" message that would *never*
be sent again to the same sender.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: