SMTP store and forward requires DSN for integrity (was Re:Clueless anti-virus )

Fri Dec 9 17:18:09 UTC 2005

On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Douglas Otis wrote:

> There is a solution you can implement now that gets rid of these tens of
> thousands of virus and abuse laden DSNs you see every day before the
> data phase.

And it is *my* responsibility to reject UBE that shouldn't have been
generated in the first place, because...?

Blocking the UBE is not the solution; it is a bandage over a bleeding
artery.  The solution is not to generate the UBE in the first place.

You'll note that, again, I am very explicitly not equating these to DSNs.
As I said before in N forms, I don't care what color of shirt the virus
"warning" wears; if sent to a forged address, it is UBE and deserved to be
treated as such.

-- 
-- Todd Vierling <tv at duh.org> <tv at pobox.com> <todd at vierling.name>