From: Andrzej Filip <anfi(_at_)Box43(_dot_)pl>
...
Sorry, I am unable to accept reliability above 99.9% without proof.
How have you measured and VERIFIED the accuracy ?
Yes. By my lights, if you "filter" spam, then you never read or even
see it. However, to ensure that the DCC is doing the right thing and
perhaps morbid curiosity, every several hours, I plow through 50-200
trap catches. I've been doing this for years. Among all of those
messages sent to my traps, there was only one that might reasonably
have wanted a 5yz "no such user" because it was not spam.
If mail to those addresses generated DSNs or 5yz responses, some spammers
would stop sending to them. That would hurt my spam filtering efforts.
Thus, it is best that mail to those addresses goes to /dev/null
(except for representative samples that are archived on CDROM so
that I can respond to lying spammers demanding changes to my blacklist.)
I wrote that the recipient has the right to send any message to
/dev/null, I have not requested any exceptions for spamtraps (The
spamtrap is the recipient).
In that case, I don't understand your position. If it is ok for humans
and mechanical spam traps to send their incoming mail to /dev/null, then
why is it not ok for their agents to do the same sending to /dev/null on
their behalf and given their permission? Their agents are MTAs and ISPs.
If those agents are smart, they'll keep good logs to answer hostile
user questions about what is being discarded. Keeping those logs and
answering those questions has nothing to do with the concerns of third
parties. The only parties that matter are the mail target the target's
agents. Third parties including mail senders have no interests.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg