Hello Mean,
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002 at 4:56:49 AM you [MD] wrote (at least
in part):
So I, as postmaster, would be receiving bounce messages from users who
have been spoofing my return address and routing? That'll get them
kicked off the system as fast as I can dig up my logs.
With
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, 10:07:00 AM, Peter Palmreuther wrote:
I'm sorry for being forced to disillusionate you, but this faking
bounces ain't fighting spam even in the slightest way. It has
nothing in common with any successful spam fighting technology, the
effect of bounces and faked
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Mark,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 20:24:29 -0800 your time, you said:
MW Are you suggesting that there is a way to prevent Mailwasher from doing
MW this?
No, I wasn't suggesting it, but as the question has been asked, yes, you can
easily prevent
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Peter,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:07:00 +0100 your time, you said:
PP ... this faking bounces ain't fighting spam even in the slightest
PP way. It has nothing in common with any successful spam fighting
PP technology, the effect of
Dear Mean,
On 04:46 04.12.2002, you [Mean Drake ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote...
You misunderstand. The bounced mail seems to be formatted differently
from other replies. It is made to look as if it came from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and unless one really analyses the header...well
it works. I know it
Dear Peter,
On 11:07 04.12.2002, you [Peter Palmreuther
([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote...
But there the problem is located: ISP can't direct the double bounces
to the originator and they can't fire all customers. So the result is:
They can fine the customers for sending out mails with a forged
Dear Simon,
On 14:35 04.12.2002, you [Simon ([EMAIL PROTECTED])]
wrote...
at all significant, and if a postmaster is going to whine about the
occassional bounced message they've he or she has spend far too much time
tracing back to a local Mailwasher user then well, what can I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Johannes,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:21:02 +0100 your time, you said:
JP I think it is a good time to remember everyone that eMail is a
JP *priviledge*, not a right. Mind you, there are still providers that do
JP not offer you a mailbox.
- Original Message -
From: Peter Palmreuther
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Bounce Mail
Hello Mean,
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002 at 4:56:49 AM you [MD] wrote (at least
in part):
First a small thanks for an exhaustive review of bouncing from a
postmaster's
- Original Message -
From: Simon
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: Bounce Mail
Perhaps the people tugging at their locks over the idea of
Mailwasher
bouncing messages should grab a copy, being as it is free, and
investigate
before throwing tantrums
Dear Simon,
On 15:58 04.12.2002, you [Simon ([EMAIL PROTECTED])]
wrote...
Huh? What are you on about exactly?
To speak on a bit more ironical terms, the fact that my mail server
accepts mails from you is a priviledge, not a right. Please don't
think it is targeted at you, you're just an
Dear Mean,
On 16:14 04.12.2002, you [Mean Drake ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote...
What about [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Basically, since your mail client tries to imitate a bounce but does
not supply a NULL sender to the mail server, it does change nothing
but generates a whole bunch more of load onto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Johannes,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:35:41 +0100 your time, you said:
JP Plus, every message that *YOU* generate and send will be different from
JP a real bounce, both generated at receive time by a negative recipient
JP verify, or by your
Dear Simon,
On 17:48 04.12.2002, you [Simon ([EMAIL PROTECTED])]
wrote...
Fair enough. So basically you are saying that even though 'the bounce' may
work on occasion with Mailwasher it is no more than a gimmick as it would be
obvious to anyone that it was not a genuine bounced message
Hello Mean,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:44:44 +0530 GMT (04/12/02, 22:14 +0700 GMT),
Mean Drake wrote:
Definitely yes! RFCs not only recommend, but require postmaster@ being
a active and read address per domain.
What about [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFC 2142 is the one you want to check out.
--
Cheers,
* Mean Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One feature I would like is to have TB bounce my mail.
Why?
--
Best regards, Carsten
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo DG,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:57:39 -0500 your time, you said:
DRS And a bounce is also good for having spambots validate e-mail addresses
DRS depending on the routing path of the bounce. snip This is how you
DRS plan to stop spam in your inbox?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Mark,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 18:25:00 -0800 your time, you said:
MW Obviously you looked up feature in a different dictionary from the one
MW I use.
There's no need to be so sarcastic :-/ If you have an opinion about it,
fine, but I didn't
18 matches
Mail list logo
