Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 13
January 1999 at 02:52:50 +0100
> On 04-Jan-99 17:12:52, Dave Sill wrote something about "Re: Why Red Hat is not
>distributing qmail". I just couldn't help replying to it, thus:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>In some situations Qmail is less efficient than sendmail, and its
> >>performance is sorely lacking.
>
> > Every complex system has weaknesses.
>
> Which is a poor excuse for at least some of qmail's weaknesses.
>
> >>Qmail does not verify envelope sender addresses, right out of the
> >>box.
>
> > Nor should it. The bounce mechanism works.
>
> It does? Then perhaps it is qmail that is broken? Because I sure see lots
> of double bounces.
I, also, would prefer not to accept email with bogus sender addresses,
because of the double-bounce problem. However, *if* envelope sender
checking becomes common, then spamming software will simply send
everything with no envelope sender -- which we're obliged to accept
since that's bounce message format. Or they'd forge something else
valid.
And checking the sender is fairly expensive, too.
Checking the sender would provide a little bit of extra help right
now, but it wouldn't last long. It's no long-term answer to spam.
It's easy to work around once spammers realize it's being checked.
> >>Qmail does not support RBL, right out of the box.
>
> > Nor should it. There's an add-on to do that.
>
> RBL support, these days, in a world that isn't as perfect as qmail was
> designed to view it, is not an option, but rather a requirement. Out of the
> box. But as long as you are not allowed to distribute such a setup, there is
> little point in discussing it.
I'm running RBL with qmail, and it was perfectly simple to install
(I'm using rblsmtp). According to my logs, it blocks fewer spam
messages than get through to my account alone. While I approve of the
RBL, and have seen it do good (both Panix and the University of
Minnesota have changed policies and done cleanup work to halt their
use as an open relay shortly after discovering they'd made the RBL), I
hardly consider it a necessity for any system. It actually blocks
only a small fraction of the spam trying to get to me.
--
David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ddb.com/~ddb (photos, sf) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ The Ouroboros Bookworms
Join the 20th century before it's too late!
