On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 11:28:16PM +0100, Rob MacGregor wrote:
> Check the RFCs. I'm pretty sure that at least abuse@ and postmaster@
> are required to be accepted. Auto responders etc have resulted in
> (that I know of) at least one ISP finding themselves on the wrong end
> of a number of RBLs (as the result is to make it almost impossible to
> report spam/abuse).
Valid point, and I wonder if I worded my email wrong. Regardless of the
RFCs, I think some emails need to exist, and actually go somewhere,
otherwise RBLs will take a stand. What I'm saying, is that email
with attachments to these special addresses should have something
done to them.
Thinking about it, I don't know what. I do see that blocking at the end
of DATA could cause a RBL backlash.
Pity there isn't a "WARNING: Message accepted, but forced into plain text"
that would get to the user (bouncing this to the From address seems a
bad idea).
Perhaps attachments to these addresses get tagged with a header:
POSTMASTER-SPAM?
and we leave the decision to the email user, or their email rules?
Thanks Rob, for highlighting the problem here. Shows I need to think
about it some more.
-Paul
--
Paul Whittney ArriveTech, Inc.
Network Specialist / Systems Engineer / |3823 W 12th St, Suite A
/--|Erie, PA, 16505, USA
PWhittney [at] arrivetech.com (Main) / |www.arrivetech.com
PWhittney [at] net.arrivetech.com (Aux) / |Tel: 814 868 3306
_______________________________________________
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it.
Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com
MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected]
http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
