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

Re: a question on email headers

On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 12:27:25PM -0700, nate wrote:
| Derrick dman Hudson said:
| > Trivial.  (except, as someone else said, for the last Received: header
| > which is added by your own machine.  No one else has control over how your
| > machine reports info)
| just a minor point but it came to mind so might as well mention it..

It's a good point to make.

| the last Recieved: header can be incorrect(may be difficult to spoof
| but it may not be accurate).
| first situation, a few years ago I was having trouble with port forwarding
| on one of my firewalls for smtp, so I reverted to rinetd instead(a lovely
| app, though I've only ever seen it on debian). For SMTP, the mail server
| recorded every inbound message as comming from the firewall rather then
| the remote system I guess due to how rinetd forwards.

I have this situation right now too.  I moved on campus a few weeks
ago, then found out they block port 25.  So, using iptables, I made
the "router" at my parents' house NAT port 25 incoming to another port
on my "real" machine.  At the TCP/IP level, every connection _is_ from
the router, though I know the connection really originated elsewhere.
It also means, as you indicated, that any IP-based UCE controls don't
work :-).  A slightly better solution, I think, would be to get pkcipe
working so that the original packets can simply be routed as-is
through the tunnel.  I haven't had time to experiment fully with
setting up the tunnel.


A)bort, R)etry, B)ang it with a large hammer

Attachment: pgpGyq4bTainH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: