On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:00:01 +0200 (CEST), you wrote:
The Sunday 2005-05-15 at 00:02 +1000, Colin Carter wrote:
This is bad practice - it tells the spammers that there is a receiving server acting on the mail which means they can send more spam to that
Thanks Anders and Dylan. Silly me - KMail told me that a return message would be sent saying that there was no such address. Sometimes I feel like beating the sh.. out of these guys.
I heard of that, and I wondered why they did it.
Bouncing spam "might" make sense at the server level. The smtp server rejects an email, and the previous server (not yours) in the chain has to generate a bounce message bak - which might not work if the return address is false, as in your case.
I personally think it is more sensible to silently dump them; but maybe kmail guys think otherwise and can give pros for bouncing :-?
-- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
I'm not a kmail guy, but I can tell you why my SA is set to bounce instead of drop - on the off chance a real email is caught by my filters, I want the sender to know I didn't see their message, and why. Mike- -- Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive. -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments.