leToff wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote :
>
>> I don't see how you could tell from that received header whether the
>> machine is a proxy, or whether it originated the traffic itself.
>>
>>
> Simply because I sent that message myself using telnet connected to
> the 1st MX of toad.com (not tested the 2nd).
Ah, well, that wasn't exactly obvious from the Received header that you
posted, now was it?! Heh, that was one vital piece of info without which
nobody could be sure they understood exactly what it was that you were
showing us. I thought it might have been a quote from one of the headers of
one of the spams!
> It's so easy to verify by
> yourself that I don't understand why you don't trust me.
Oh, I do believe you; I was just pointing out that the evidence you were
showing was insufficiently clear/complete.
> BTW, Open Relay is propably more appropriate to define this machine.
The toad machine certainly is an open relay, the one that was connecting
to it is an anonymising mix-proxy.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
