On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Matt Sergeant <m...@sergeant.org> wrote: > On Thu, 28 May 2009, David Nicol wrote: > >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:18 AM, David Favor <da...@davidfavor.com> wrote: >> >> I wrote a plugin to create VERP variable envelope return path >> addresses for each and every message passing through my forwarding >> system
> This is essentially BATV. > > However beware that BATV does break some things: > > - It will drop your outbound mails to ezmlm mailing lists into the > moderation queue (unless you have some sort of "don't VERP mails to these > addresses" function and remember all your mailing lists). > > - It will "break" some remote whitelisting systems which look at the MAIL > FROM to determine if your mail is in the whitelist. > > - It will cause some greylisting systems to greylist every email you send. > > Also, for BATV you need to make sure you have FULL and UTTER control of all > your outbounds. > > If you're willing to live with these issues then BATV works great. > > Matt. it's a forwarding system; authenticated relay traffic is exempt; verping allows the relays pass SPF checks without revealing original envelope sender, the system is intended to /be/ the whitelisting system rather than being ahead of one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_Address_Tag_Validation the difference is, instead of encoding the user-part with a signature, i provide completely random user-part and store in a database what each one implies. Which may not scale, but there's no worry about cryptoanalysis. -- between myriad opposing forces
