On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 01:58:00AM +0200, Arjen Meek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:15:19AM +0200, Michael Renzmann wrote:
> > I agree, but I also see no reason to have this discussion arising over 
> > and over again. Local filtering should do the trick until that moron 
> > understands that it is a bad idea to automatic ansers to the spoofed 
> > sender of a virus mail.
> 
> My mailserver runs qmail (actually mailfront for SMTP) and rejects any
> message that ClamAV thinks to contain a virus with a "554 Message
> refused", which in my opinion is the correct SMTP reply for any
> message I don't want on my server (silently dropping the mail seems
> like a risky thing to do). No bounce message is sent by my server.
> 
> However, I recieved this from the mailinglist manager:
> > Your membership in the mailing list LARTC has been disabled due to
> > excessive bounces The last bounce received from you was dated
> > 21-Apr-2005.  You will not get any more messages from this list until
> > you re-enable your membership.  You will receive 3 more reminders like
> > this before your membership in the list is deleted.
> 
> Looking at my logs it must be outpost.ds9a.nl actually generating the
> bounce message.
> 
> If 554 is not the right reply for such a message, what would be a better
> way to indicate that the message is concidered utacceptable by my
> server?
> If it is the best reply, what should I do to avoid being kicked off the
> list because my mail server doesn't say "that's fine with me" when it
> gets sent a virus message?

I am having the same problem but using debian + exim & clamav

> 
> Sorry for replying to an offtopic thread, but since the virus problem
> is apparently known here I figured someone might be able to tell me the
> correct way to handle such situations.
> 
> Personally, I think it would be a very good thing for any system that
> distributes e-mail, especially one that multiplies it as well like a
> mailing list does, to refuse distributing content that is clearly of a
> malicious nature, to avoid increasing the size of the problem.
> 
> regards,
> Arjen
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list
> LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Reply via email to