On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 11:19:35AM -0400, Jason A. Smith wrote: > On 09/08/2010 10:48 AM, Kenneth Marshall wrote: >> >> In principle, an informative bounce is okay. Unfortunately, it can >> be taken advantage of by unscrupulous mailers to send SPAM messages >> to other E-mail addresses with the consequent impact to your mail >> reputation and ability to send E-mail from your domain to others. >> If you restrict such bounces to local authenticated E-mail, then >> you can minimize the risk through the use of accountability. >> >> Cheers, >> Ken > > True, but if your RT is setup to accept email tickets from anywhere, > because there is no central directory of known email addresses and a need > for many people to be able to submit tickets, then it doesn't matter since > the "sender" (real or fake) will either get the no subject bounce or the rt > ticket created auto-reply. > > Also, in our procmail, the no subject check is the last filter before the > queue check rules. Before these are several other rules to filter out > spam, and emails from mailers, lists, daemons, etc... > > ~Jason >
True, these sorts of attacks are caught in our situation by the anti-spam filter before submitting the message to RT. The same setup could help ameleorate this back-scatter problem of a no- subject bounce as well. Cheers, Ken RT Training in Washington DC, USA on Oct 25 & 26 2010 Last one this year -- Learn how to get the most out of RT!