On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 08:29:12PM -0700, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> Do you have other patches that we should put in? :-)

No patch, but a coworker recently told me that MTAs should now be
considering an opening HELO as optional -- if the sender wants to lunge
right in with a RCPT, it's permissible.  I can't find an RFC confirming
as much, but it does seem to be done that way by exim and sendmail.

A tangentially related issue I noticed is that of direct-to-MX spammers
conducting blind transmissions -- they write helo/rcpt/mail/data and the
contents of the mail without regard to the error values returned, thus
incurring a stream of 500 errors (and putting the spam in my maillog,
since I leave tracing enabled.)

Still trying to think of a good response to that one.  The nearest
approximation I can think of is to presume the spammer hasn't doctored
or reimplemented their own TCP stack, cramp the TCP receive window size
down, and if the sending host ignores a 553 on DATA in ESMTP, or on
anything in SMTP mode, close or cork the socket.  It might avoid
transmission of some packets, or it might be a total waste of effort.

-- 
Devin  \ aqua(at)devin.com, 1024D/E9ABFCD2;  http://www.devin.com
Carraway \ IRC: Requiem  GCS/CC/L s-:--- !a !tv C++++$ ULB+++$ O+@ P L+++

Reply via email to