Spam to this list

[Paul Slootman]

On Tue 19 Apr 2005, Andrew Gideon wrote:
> Paul Slootman wrote:
> 
> > There's a difference between giving a 5xx response during SMTP, and
> > first accepting a message and then later bouncing it to the (supposed)
> > envelope sender. I believe spamcop is protesting the latter, not the
> > first. I agree with them. 20% of the junk I get are bogus bounces.
> 
> For good or ill, SMTP is a store-and-forward mechanism.  The node in the
> process of delivering to the node which issues the rejection is no longer
> in a position to issue its own rejection.  Instead, it must send a separate
> "bounce" message to the - claimed, unfortunately - sender.

Yes, and if the first system in the chain would do it, spam wouldn't
leave the originating system. (The first system is often an open
relay, or my system in case of zombie PCs that are sending out the spam.)


Paul Slootman