At 9:36 AM +0200 8/25/01, Salvatore Toribio imposed structure on a
stream of electrons, yielding:
>Hi,
>
>I have the option "Verify Return Paths" on. I can't understad why
>this message has not been rejected. There is no Return-Path and no
>From field... And, of course, the attachment is a virus.
A null return path is valid. Any message generated by a mail server
(for example, all bounces and all proper delivery notifications)
should have a null return path, so it is a very bad idea to reject
messages with null return paths.
Note that "Verify Return Paths" is, like all the best automated spam
filters, an idiot-trap. If a spammer wants to get around it, doing so
is trivial. It catches the most profoundly unintelligent class of
spammers who use completely bogus domains in forged return paths. It
catches a lot of spam, but it is an extremely coarse filter.
--
Bill Cole
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
