I know and am aware of the drawbacks. But it's a benefit versus risk thing.
I get more benefit from it than risk, so I do it.
Percentage-wise the majority of the spam I get is from null senders.
Personally, I'd rather NOT have to use the null sender option. But, on the
other hand, I am not paying a mint for some damn anti-spam front end that
won't work well with null senders. *IF* they pass that legislation where
spammers will get fined $500 for each spam, then I will disable it and then
charge them for each and every spam that my users get.
I have a ZERO tolerance policy on spam.
# -----Original Message-----
# From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
# Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 10:07 AM
# To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Subject: RE: ORBSSRC: RE: [IMail Forum] Time to fix "Refuse NULL <>
# Senders" option!
#
#
#
# ># but no longer are. Same with refusing <>. It causes other postmasters
# ># troubles.
# >It only causes the postmasters that allow their mail users that SEND mail
# >with null headers problems the way I see it
#
# The problem arises if you send an E-mail to a non-existant user on one of
# our domains. If our mail server bounces the message back to you,
# your mail
# server is going to choke on it, and send it back to
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then, we have to deal with your
# mistake. That's why many mail admins want to use this new
# dsn.rfc-ignorant.com test.
#
# >If every mail server blocked null senders, the problem would
# probably go away.
#
# Yes, but nobody would ever get any bounce messages. Bounce messages are
# there for a reason.
#
# >According to my logs, my mail server bounces between 5 and 10
# messages a day
# >based on null sender.
#
# Have you checked to see how many of those are spam, and how many
# are bounce
# messages that you're making another postmaster deal with (perhaps the one
# that is going to block your mail server)?
#
# Even if they are all spam, how many spams do you get per day that
# don't use
# the NULL sender? I've just gone back a bit further, and of the past 68
# spams we've received, not one has used a NULL sender.
#
# Of course, you are free to block NULL senders, just so long as you are
# aware of the possible consequences. If you know the drawbacks, and still
# want to do it, it's your choice. My goal is just to make sure
# that you and
# others are aware of the drawbacks, and why we feel it's a bad choice.
#
# -Scott
#
# Declude: Anti-spam and Anti-virus solutions for IMail.
http://www.declude.com
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
