REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs)

Jeroen Massar jeroen at unfix.org
Tue Jul 1 04:54:46 CDT 2008


Chris Owen <owenc at hubris.net> wrote

> It is because, if someone reports (by telephone, IRC or IRL) that he
> sent an email and I did not receive it, I regard as VERY IMPORTANT to
> be able to check the spam folder (with a search tool, not by hand) and
> go back to him saying "No, we really did not receive it".

The magic keyword: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA.

Aka during the "DATA" phase of the email, also directly scan it, then 
when the spam/virus tool thinks it is spam/virus, you just reject it.

This solves a couple of things in one go:

  - You don't have to handle bounces if you would send a bounce back
    to the sender "hey you had a spam/virus" because you already accepted
    the mail, thus less overhead at least there

  - The sending SMTP server will send a bounce back to the sender.
    The sender thus gets a SMTP rejection mail, with the rejection
    reason and knows that you didn't accept the message and why.
    They can then opt to change the content of the mail or contact you
    differently.

  - No more 'spam' folder, as the stuff that is spam is already rejected.
    You might get a few mails through that are actually spam, but this is
    mostly marginal.

This thus solves completely that email "gets lost". Also note that if a 
virus/bot or something else silly is trying to send these mails it 
either has to handle the bounces, which they generally (afaik ;) don't, 
thus the faked sender doesn't get a swamp of failed deliveries either.
This is a Win-Win situation in my ears.

Unfortunately there is also a side-effect, partially, one has to have 
all inbound servers use this trick, and it might be that they need to be 
a bit heavier to process and scan all that mail. Then again, you can 
better let sending SMTP servers queue a bit (or throttle them) then 
having to process them anyway later.

Of course not all mail platforms can be fitted in this way, but people 
who have such systems probably already have other ways to handle things.

For the excellent Spamassassin, read:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/IntegratedInMta

The 'milter' options (originally sendmail, but nowadays also available 
for other mailers) can do this for you. Other anti-spam tools might also 
be able to do similar things. YMMV.

Oh and of course as a access-ISP, one should also employ this trick to 
the customers, that way they know that they are sending spam ;)

Greets,
  Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080701/faf8d80b/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list