[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 03/24/2004 08:22:38 AM: > <SARCASM> > Would he be happier with a virus? It sounds to me like he would be. So I'd > code an exception based on him the sender, and him the recipient, to not do > any filtering whatsoever. Let his box fill with spam, and let him be the > source of all virus propagation within the organization. > </SARCASM> Sarcasm noted. He was the sender to another recipient and the message was just vanishing. That's one of the beautifull things about MD (and CanIT), is that it can issue a permanent failure when you refuse to accept a message. If the receiver had done that, I would have had something to go on when trying to help my director. All I had to go on was my logs showing the message being delivered. Finally we got a tech at the other end to admit they were blocking the subject "For your review" because one of the viruses was using that as a subject.
By issuing a reject, the wrath justifiably falls upon the relay being used to send the virus, not us. And if a real sender gets rejected, they have some clue as to what's going on. If a virus is detected, I am far more agreeable that the message can be quietly discarded. But blocking on content without notification is wrong. _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
