Title: Message
I think that while the spamdomains test is wonderful, many people are trying to overuse it as a test.  IMO it is there to protect against forgeries of the major e-mail services, and it does that task great.  It's usefullness declines when it is used in a greater fashion.  For example, we stop a couple hundred e-mails that use aol, msn, hotmail, yahoo, etc, but we stop only 1-3 on smaller domains.  Using this test for the smaller domains isn't worth the false positives that it produces.  But again in the defense of spamdomains, this isn't "his" fault.  It just wasn't mean for that.......
 
 
Jason
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd - Smart Mail
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 6:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Spamdomains com.

FYI  Spamdomians failed this.  Which it should have based on my SP entry of com. although it was a valid email.  Its an invoice sent by someone to my client though intuits online invoicing system.
 
What is everyone using for "com."  
 
 
Received: from mail2.smart-mail.net [65.16.167.134] by net.smart-mail.net
  (SMTPD32-7.07) id AC92AD90152; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:33:06 -0500
Received: from sdm3.quickbooks.net ([208.240.241.110])
 by mail2.smart-mail.net (SAVSMTP 3.0.1.45) with SMTP id M2003080116330213145
 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:33:02 -0500
Received: from ipp3.qbn.ie.intuit.com (ipp3.qbn.ie.intuit.com [10.9.2.76])
 by sdm3.quickbooks.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h71LX2V27979
 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:33:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:33:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
X-RBL-Warning: SPAMDOMAINS: Spamdomain 'com.' found: Address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent from invalid sdm3.quickbooks.net.
 
 
Thanks,
 
Todd

Reply via email to