On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 14:53 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2005-06-30 at 08:27 -0400, Ken Schneider wrote:
describe DNS_FROM_RFC_POST Envelope sender in postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org describe DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS Envelope sender in whois.rfc-ignorant.org
The MAJOR problem with this is they (rfc-ignorant.org) expect everyone, including spammers, to play nice and not send spam to the postmaster address. They also expect the spammers to play nice and not harvest addresses from the whois data bases. This is the reason that rfc-ignorant.org is going to have problems. Perhaps someone needs to add their postmaster or abuse address to a spam list and see how fast they shutdown the addresses.
I don't understand. Could you expand on it? I mean, why rfc-ignorant.org list or not list a server? I don't know what they do and why. A link, perhaps?
Because they expect ALL email servers to be properly setup, which not all are. And the main problem is spammers are sending spam to abuse@some.domain, postmaster@some.domain (you fill in the domain part) and the owners of the domains receiving the spam are expected to just receive the spam with no ability to reject it (the spam that is).
I can guess from what you said that comcast has removed the postmaster address, and then rfc-ignorant.org list them. Is that it?
This has nothing to do directly with comcast, this is only an example of what is wrong with postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org's thinking. That domain owners are expected to accept any and all spam sent to the postmaster address with no recourse.
You cannot fight the spammers by simply playing fair because the spammers never will play fair. Because of this poeple are going to hide their whois contact info or use phony info and they will block their postmaster and abuse address.
Mmm. But mailers send automatically bounces to those addresses. They must exist! Else, other servers will have secondary bounces.
Not that it does matter... I think many server, including major ISPs just dump email sent to postmaster...
Exactly my point. what is the difference if you bounce or /dev/null email to the postmaster address? I guess in order to make my domain rfc compliant I will start accepting email again and just /dev/null it (and any other system account that receives spam including abuse). -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge