On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 23.09.2015 um 19:24 schrieb Philip Prindeville:
Stating facts here, not giving an opinion. Not sure what’s up for debate.
if it is empty it's <> aka Null-Sender and you really don't block that
because you violating RFC's, block sane autoreplies usng it to prevent
mail-loops and the subject indiactes one thing; you donät really
understand how email works
Rejecting messages based on their content PERIOD is violating the RFC’s.
What’s your point?
do what you want - a empty envelope from is not a sign of spam
An empty envelope from by itself is not a spam sign but when combined with
other characteristics of a message can be a good spam sign.
For example almost everthing coming from outlook.com is locally generated
messages (either new user created content or NDRs). User generated content
has headers added to indicate that, NDRs have have headers added to indicate
that.
So take Null-Sender && sourced from outlook.com && has client-headers &&
not-have NDR-headers is a very good spam indicator.
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
