But... What would you try to block considering that headers can be modified/forged?
I understand what you are saying but I don't see that it can be accomplished with any guarantee of accuracy. So, I'm not saying A is necessarily at fault, but they are going to pay B's price for delivering to B what B deems as spam. Regards, Mark -- _________________________________________________________________ L. Mark Stone, Founder North America's Leading Zimbra VAR/BSP/Training Partner For Companies With Mission-Critical Email Needs Winner of the Zimbra Americas VAR Partner of the Year 2024 Award ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Kasper Peeters via mailop" <mailop@mailop.org> | To: "Slavko via mailop" <mailop@mailop.org> | Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2025 3:53:43 PM | Subject: Re: [mailop] Mail Forwarders should not do DKIM signing right? |> Any user on A can setup forwarding to any/many address/es of B and then send |> SPAMs to A, which have to be unconditonally accepted on B? How hard will be to |> run dedicated A without any SPAM filter for this purpose? | | I am not saying that B should necessarily blindly trust A. But if a spammer on S | sets up a forward on A to a victim at B, then I would say that the correct | thing to do for B would be to block S (that is, any mail that originated from | S, not necessarily delivered directly by S), not A. Of course that's no longer | a simple iptables block now. | | Thanks, | Kasper | | | | | _______________________________________________ | mailop mailing list | mailop@mailop.org | https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
