--On 8 January 2008 08:10:57 +0900 Michael Heydon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Eiloart wrote: >> I've seen several instances over the past few years where I've had to >> disable user accounts here because of backscatter. This isn't simply a >> theoretical problem. >> > Out of curiosity, what percentage (roughly) of this backscatter was > proper bounce messages and what percentage was OoO replies? 0% was proper bounce messages. None of the bounces went to the originator of the message. I don't know the precise answer to the question. However, I do know that in some instances it's been sufficient to block messages with empty return-path, in other instances the majority of the messages haven't had empty return-paths. However, I also know that there are many sites out there that don't use empty return-paths for non-delivery bounces! > As I mentioned in an earlier message, I have had my address spoofed a > couple of times and the 2-3 OoO replies I recieved were buried amongst > several hundred bounces. Yes, that can happen. However, as people are increasingly using rejection rather than bouncing, the proportion of OoO replies will increase. > *Michael Heydon - IT Administrator * > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex x3148 -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
