On Saturday 05 June 2004 21:31, Marc Samendinger wrote:
I still say its a legit bounce.
It would have been a legit bounce if it was send from my box. See the following lines from the first message in this thread (go back to this message to see all headers): Received: from suse.de (pD951F606.dip.t-dialin.net [217.81.246.6]) by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B95668F3BE for <25866@suse.de>; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 10:13:32 +0200 (CEST) From: suse-security@de-korte.org As I have already indicated countless times before and which is shown again here, the message was not sent from this annoying t-dialin.net customer. The real sender was a 't-dialin.net' customer who spoofed the sender address 'suse-security@de-korte.org'. You totally missed my point that bouncing messages based on virus/spam content is wrong for the above mentioned reason (you'd be creating a new spam problem in the process).
I'm awaiting your answer and wonder if you will prove me wrong.
As I was on holiday, the reply was late. Yet, if you still don't get it, I'm wasting my time anyway. Regards, Arjen