30 Aug
2001
30 Aug
'01
6:39 p.m.
Philip S Tellis spewed into the ether:
<snip>
Any idea why this is allowed (there is a special rule
to allow it) at
all?
A NULL sender <> is required for bounces/error messages.
This is required by RFC 2821 (originally 821).
31 Aug
31 Aug
1:12 a.m.
New subject: Possible spam hole in mail servers
Sometime on Aug 30, dodobh(a)nettaxi.com assembled some asciibets to say:
error reporting is to specify a null reverse-path in
the MAIL
command of a notification message. When such a message is relayed
it is permissible to leave the reverse-path null. A MAIL command
with a null reverse-path appears as follows:
MAIL FROM:<>
But this still allows spammers to send anonymous mails. What's the RFC
compliant solution?
Philip
--
"I'm a simple man with complex tastes."
-- Calvin
Visit my webpage at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/
Read my writings at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/writings/
MSN philiptellis Yahoo! philiptellis
1 Sep
1 Sep
2:05 a.m.
New subject: Possible spam hole in mail servers
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Philip S Tellis spewed into the ether:
But this still allows spammers to send anonymous
mails. What's the
RFC compliant solution?
No RFC compliant solution, AFAIK. Shoot a few spammers,
maybe?
Devdas Bhagat
--
Good day to avoid cops. Crawl to school.
8060
days inactive
8062
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Devdas Bhagat -
dodobh＠nettaxi.com
-
Philip S Tellis