OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
Subject: Re: null reverse-path
From: furio ercolessi (furiospin.it)
Date: Tue Jul 04 2000 - 01:32:25 CDT

On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 12:03:46PM +0700, adi wrote:
>
> Again, I don't like the idea of rejecting (refusing) the null
> reverse-path, but if we want it to become standard, then it should
> said clearly.
>
> But, as Brad (brk at skynet.be) said to me: "And they'd probably get
> themselves put on any number of various black lists, etc....". I
> guess, even in the real world, this behaviour (rejecting null
> reverse-path) would not be accepted. Don't know if there is such a
> host that would be listed in RBL or something, just because she
> reject mail with null reverse-path.

To be listed in RBL you need to emit spam (or host a spamadvertised
site), be notified and do not act. So this cannot be a reason for
being blacklisted by itself.

However: there is often an observable correlation between domains
not accepting <> and appearing in the sender address of spams.
Ever seen spam from addresses in 126.com, sina.com, unbounded.com,
yeah.net ? There is little doubt that some of these organization host
spammer mailboxes, probably do not accept <> to avoid being flooded
by spam bounces, and for this reason may be eligible to listing.

furio ercolessi
Spin