[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Unfortunately if someone has run a dictionary attack on a domain the number of unwanted responses to locations that don't exist is a pain for everyone - so you cannot win either way. Best regards Mick E: mick@xxxxxxxxxxxx T: +44(0)1626 323592 M: +44(0)77255 18156 F: +44(0)1626 323591 > From: James Fidell <james@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Organization: CloudNine Consultants Ltd., Pitsford Hill Farm, Pitsford Hill, > Wiveliscombe, Somerset TA4 2RR. Reg. No. 3317659 > Reply-To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:00:35 +0100 > To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [LUG] email > > Mick Vaites wrote: >> The only other thing would be that the catchall points at a bit bin - >> :BLACKHOLE: in exim speak. So email not addressed to a real email address is >> just dropped. >> >> That way a dictionary attack doesn't cause unnecessary 'not at this address' >> bounces. > > It's generally considered that the "proper" thing to do is for the > recieving MTA to reject the message as soon as it sees an undeliverable > address in the RCPT command. That way you have to neither bounce nor > accept the message and subsequently drop it, possibly confusing people > who have mistyped an address, because your MTA never accepts it in the > first place. > > It's not really desirable that an MTA should accept a message and claim > to be able to deliver it, then subsequently bounce it or drop it on the > floor. > > James > > -- > The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG > http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list > FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html