Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 13:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I am one of the "some" -- false positives will drop into the black >> hole of nothingness. > > As you will prefer if your address is ever forged as the sender on > thousands/millions of virus or spam-bot messages.
I can well believe that. Hopefully SPF will become more universal - that should put a serious crimp on sender-spoofing. > I think the distinction between sides is whether or not your own > address has been abused (yet...). But, I was wondering if it would > make sense to look at the number of Received: lines. If yours is the > first - or maybe it hasn't been added yet when MimeDefang sends it - > it should always be reasonable to reject with a 5xx code since in > this case you are talking directly to the submitter. If an > intermediate relay has added a Received: header then a 5xx for a > virus is almost certainly going to cause the wrong thing to happen. Interesting. Viruses can and do forge Received headers, or their absence, of course... but some might not... If either the relay or the forged sender's MX has virus-scanning, there is still hope. -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
