[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Which is why I qualified my reply with "if the sending relay is a valid >> SMTP client."
> Maybe we are just arguing semantics but anything that connects to > my mail server and speaks RFC821 is valid. I might not like what > it feeds me but that is what ClamAV/SpamAssassin is for. :) OK, let me be precise: By "valid SMTP client", I mean one that generates a DSN in response to a 5xx status code. > Returning a 5xx message is neither hard or resource intensive. I'm not arguing that. I'm just disagreeing with the statement that it's a good idea. > Then even in the unlikely event of a false positive the sender > knows. This is so unlikely that the backscatter risk outweighs the benefit. Regards, David. _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
