--On 17 October 2006 02:45:10 +0100 John Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17/10/2006 01:45, Marc Sherman wrote: >> John Robinson wrote: >>> I may still be being very dense, of course :-) >> >> Yes, you still are. :) Sending _any_ auto-response is a bad thing, >> because the sender address of the spam (which is the vast majority of >> posts by unsubscribed addresses) is almost always forged, so that >> auto-response is backscatter. > > That's unfortunate, but ought to be mostly avoidable if you've done a > spot of filtering on the original incoming message, and the > auto-response is useful, imo. If necessary the auto-response could > briefly note the possibility it's backscatter, but disabling it feels > like giving in to the spammers, something I'm sure we'd all rather > avoid. Has the problem has now reached such epic proportions that these > auto-responses are causing more harm than good? > How about 9,000 autoreply messages arriving over the weekend, sticking in my incoming queue for a user who's mailbox is already full of them. Having removed them yesterday, there's a couple of hundred more today. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
