I do think, if there is a permission based sender, then there will be a
full imprint in the email (or at least a link to one), so that the
recipient knows the sender. At our company, we enforce an imprint in
every mail.
I don't think Benoit is talking about a legitimate sender.
Cheers,
Mathias
Am 13.06.2016 um 20:31 schrieb Jay Hennigan:
On 6/13/16 10:08 AM, Laura Atkins wrote:
Scenario 3:
Victim to ESP: I got this spam from your IP and have no idea why. It
touts some product, but all of the links are tracking bugs that point
back to you. Where did you get my address and on whose behalf did you
send it?
ESP to victim: We believe you and we have disconnected the customer.
We’re unable to share any other information with you.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
What legitimate reason would an ESP have to shield the identity of a
permission-based sender from its recipients? What legitimate sender uses
an ESP to send permission-based mail anonymously?
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - [email protected]
Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
--
optivo GmbH
Deliverability & Abuse Management
Wallstraße 16
10179 Berlin
Telefon: 030 / 76 80 78 269
Fax: 030 / 76 80 78 499
Email: mailto:[email protected]
Website: http://www.optivo.de
Handelsregister: HRB Berlin 88738
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Rainer Brosch, Thomas Diezmann
optivo ist ein Unternehmen von Deutsche Post DHL Group
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
