Re: Rejecting viruses the Right Way[tm]
On Saturday 14 February 2004 04:39 pm, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 03:45:24PM -0500, Al Davis wrote:
> > On Friday 13 February 2004 01:18 am, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > Not so.
> >
> > Unfortunately, Karsten, you are wrong here.
>
> Back up your statement, please.
It is easy to find out if your ISP's relay works this way.
Use a MUA that lets you configure to use a remote smarthost, bypassing
your local MTA. As far as I know, all of the graphic ones let you do
this. On Windows, it is the usual way to configure them.
Compose a message, but change the "From" to where you want the bounce to
go. Put a bogus address in "To".
Send it!
> > As a result, for improper action, anything goes for that address,
> > so spammers and viruses can do what they want.
>
> Not quite. The return-path only screws with broken virus scanners
> that aren't rejecting at SMTP-time, but making up a bounce message
> incorrectly assuming that the return-path is actually accurate.
Paul: If you would like proof, let me know, and I will arrange to have
comcast bounce you a message.
Reply to: