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

Re: Unusual spam recently - hummm - postprocess

Quoting Blu (blu@daga.cl):

> Are you suggesting then, that we should not relay mail at all?, not even
> to/from our customers?

I'm quite non-plussed at this question, since it seems to suggest that you
weren't following the thread.

Earlier, I mentioned (to summarise and review) that I take care to have
my MTA reject mail it considers inherently objectionable on various
grounds, as a superior alternative to performing such processing after
acceptance.  (Among other things, it allows my system to say "no"
without being guilty of generating bogus bounces to forged addresses.)

Mr. Stone then opined that he saw no advantage because an upstream MTA
might (e.g., if it was a relay) react to my 55X Reject by issuing a
bogus bounce of its own.

I've heard this sort of comment before from people who really ought to
know better, and who actually _do_ understand the concept of local
responsibility.  Maybe they're bored and are trolling; it's difficult to
say.  Or maybe they're just following the ever-popular philosophy of
post first, think later.

To spell it out, I'm responsible for making sure _my_ MTA isn't
misbehaving.  I'm not responsible for _your_ MTA misbehaving.

If some upstream MTA (such as, hypothetically, yours) decides to take do
something irresponsible and socially destructive (such as sending spam
to a forged alleged sender) in reaction to my MTA saying "No, I don't
accept that mail", then that _other_ MTA's admin is accountable for
_his_ system's misbehaviour, and I hope and expect that we will all
(figuratively) LART him until he bleeds.

Now, if that MTA's admin says "Hey, I'm not responsible; I'm just a poor
innocent relay", I'd say he'd better get accustomed to being accountable
for mail his system sends out, since other admins _are_ clear on that
point, even if he isn't.  If the admin has no other way of making sure 
his system doesn't incontinently issue bogus "bounce" messages to forged
addresses when spam/malware is refused downstream, then he'd be well
advised to improve his _own_ ability to reject bogus mail, making its
subsequent relaying a non-issue.

Please also (since you're a relay) read the prior posted links about

Reply to: