El Mar 03 Feb 2004 07:57, Terry L Fritts escribi=F3:
Tuesday, February 3, 2004 you wrote:
CF This is not good since many domains don't allways have complete A
CF or =3D cname records for all of they sending computers (mta ou mua)
CF ... Remember many legitimate mail can come indirectly from
At 06:07 2/4/2004, Gustavo Galvan wrote:
El Mar 03 Feb 2004 07:57, Terry L Fritts escribi=F3:
Tuesday, February 3, 2004 you wrote:
CF This is not good since many domains don't allways have complete A
CF or =3D cname records for all of they sending computers (mta ou mua)
CF ... Remember
Hi Gustavo,
Gustavo Galvan wrote:
If we can't validate a sender, anyone can setup a mail server and send em=
ail=20
with a false identity (like virus does).
Have you a idea to solve this ?
(Thinking aloud...and not seen all of earlier threads)
- I don't think we can validate the
Hello Gustavo,
Wednesday, February 4, 2004 you wrote:
GG If we can't validate a sender, anyone can setup a mail server and send em=
GG ail=20
GG with a false identity (like virus does).
GG Have you a idea to solve this ?
You work with what you have and SMTP has limitations.
You can
At 18:37 2/2/2004, Tracy wrote:
At 17:12 2/2/2004, Gustavo Galvan wrote:
Ok, accepting email from only authorized MX is, by now, a crazy idea because
the biggers free email servers do not use them.
Well, you know, that's interesting. I do MX checks on RHS of MAIL FROM for
all mail received, and
El Lun 02 Feb 2004 20:42, Tracy escribi=F3:
At 18:37 2/2/2004, Tracy wrote:
At 17:12 2/2/2004, Gustavo Galvan wrote:
Ok, accepting email from only authorized MX is, by now, a crazy idea
because the biggers free email servers do not use them.
Well, you know, that's interesting. I do MX
