On 1/14/2009 4:04 AM, David Wilson wrote:
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 20:46 -0500, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 07:13:39PM -0600, Gordon Peterson wrote:
That's a bogus argument. You're basically saying that "someone else
will probably pick up on this" and using that as a (lame) excuse to lob
a grenade their way.
Perhaps you should review the SMTP protocol: sending a 5XX response
*refuses* delivery of a message. It does not transmit (or retransmit)
a message. It is difficult to see how one can be accused of "lob[bing]
a grenade" when one has never taken possession of it.
Because of the normal action of an MTA when it receives such an 5XX
response, i.e. it sends a non-delivery message, normally containing the
message, to the return path address. If that return path address is
forged, then the infection is bounced elsewhere. That is the grenade.
The grenade was not lobbed by the MTA which issued the 5xx response; it was
lobbed by the MTA which previously accepted the message from some source and
attempted to deliver it to the MTA which issued the 5xx response during the
SMTP session.
--
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
prussell(_at_)nd(_dot_)edu
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg