On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> This sort-of depends on the level of confidence you have in your
>> scanning tools. I don't think anyone wants to receive virii, although
>> an end user should have equal quality antivirus protection anyway. In
>> any case if you reject with an appropriate reason you have fulfilled a
>> mailer's obligations.
>
> Your theory doesn't permit you to have it both ways. Since you seem to agree
> that rejecting virus content at the systemwide level is appropriate, I find
> your notion of letting the end user decide everything to be nonsense.
Rejecting anything for any reason is appropriate as long as the sender
gets a reasonable non-delivery notification. But, you aren't
providing a particularly useful service if you reject reasonable
content routinely. As I mentioned, google gets it wrong regularly,
and you didn't answer my question about why you think you can do it
better. And I only know that google gets it wrong because they toss
it in a spam folder that I can check myself. Most of what they
misclassify would have been bulk-mailed stuff, but it is stuff that
I've requested or mail list messages where I am subscribed.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
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
