On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 17:38 +0100, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 18:28 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 17:19 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, RW wrote:
> > > > > > I understand that Spamhaus doesn't recommend this, because dynamic 
> > > > > > IP
> > > > > > addresses can be reassigned from a spambot to another user, but I 
> > > > > > added
> > > > > > my own rule it does seem to work. In my mail it hits about 9% of my
> > > > > > spam, with zero false-positives.
> > > > 
> > > > On 13.07.09 14:22, Tony Finch wrote:
> > > > > You will get false positives from senders that are using remote 
> > > > > message
> > > > > submission, and from some webmail users if their server puts the 
> > > > > webmail
> > > > > client IP address in the message headers.
> > > > 
> > > > agreed, although, some kind of authentication should be done in either 
> > > > case,
> > > > which should prevent the rules from hitting, but many ISPs and ESPs 
> > > > don';t
> > > > push auth informations to Received: headers...
> > 
> > On 13.07.09 16:26, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> > > Do the RFC's state that they need to?
> > 
> > yes, RFC4954 in section 7 does
> > 
> Where - I don't see it say it needs to "push auth informations to
> Recieved: Headers";
> 
> 
> 7.  Additional Requirements on Servers
> 
> 
>    As described in Section 4.4 of [SMTP], an SMTP server that receives a
>    message for delivery or further processing MUST insert the
>    "Received:" header field at the beginning of the message content.
>    This document places additional requirements on the content of a
>    generated "Received:" header field.  Upon successful authentication,
>    a server SHOULD use the "ESMTPA" or the "ESMTPSA" [SMTP-TT] (when
>    appropriate) keyword in the "with" clause of the Received header
>    field.
> 
> Am I missing what you are saying here?
> 
Got it! Now I understand where you are coming from;
Received: from [192.168.1.56] (rubiks [192.168.1.56]) by
 mail1.buzzhost.co.uk (XmasTree) 

AND HERE IT COMES.....

with ESMTPA 

....
id E0C42AC0BE for

Now it makes sense.

Reply via email to