Christian G. Warden wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 05:36:47PM -0000, Aaron Stone wrote:
It's something that end users, who are writing their Sieve scripts or using
interactive web happy Sieve editors, should take into account! It's not
something that I would want to ban programmatically, however, because of the
messy compexities and general klugey borkage it would involve.
I wasn't saying that tools like Sieve should prevent bouncing spam, but
that administrators should prevent (or at least make it difficult) users
from configuring their sorting rules to bounce spam.
Aaron
Understood. But I think that is the larger task, given that it has to be
constantly applied over a finite, but open-ended time span - and one
filled (Lybarger's Corrolary to Sod's Law [1]) with a finie, but
seemingly endless supply of sloppy, or just plain *tired* 'lusers'.
A restrictive (DB 'rules' driven?) SMTPD, OTOH, has to be written and
tested just *once*.
[1] Lybarger simplified Sods' Law (Murphy's Law to you Yanks <G>) to:
"All else being equal, *you lose*!"
Bill
