Re: Recipient validation - WAS: Re: Moderated posts?

[Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>]

On 10/15/2014 4:44 PM, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
> However, if the Reply-To: is forged, i.e. if it is spam, the
> alternative is considerably less OK. Bouncing a spam message simply
> delivers *the* *entire* *message* to an innocent third party, having
> been laundered through your (presumably legitimate and respectable) mail
> server.
> 
> So it isn't OK, but there's no alternative to doing it. That's how you
> have it both ways.

Spam doesn't have to be deleted, it can be quarantined. That is the best
way to handle spam once it has been accepted.

I don't even delete the malicious stuff, although I don't deliver it to
the recipient.