Re: [Asrg] We really don't need no stinkin IMAP or POP foram button to M

Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk> Mon, 08 February 2010 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C41533A736A for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 03:59:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.452
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.452 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dlp9YRL5K+Yb for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 03:59:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk (lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk [139.184.14.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C61C33A6F41 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2010 03:59:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk ([139.184.135.133]:65466) by lynndie.uscs.susx.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.64) (envelope-from <iane@sussex.ac.uk>) id KXIUP7-0006SP-6A; Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:00:43 +0000
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:00:43 +0000
From: Ian Eiloart <iane@sussex.ac.uk>
Sender: iane@sussex.ac.uk
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Message-ID: <D5E318E219CCBAFB23E087F2@lewes.staff.uscs.susx.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002061524280.11458@simone.lan>
References: <20100206200921.7841.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <4B6DCF41.1070006@dcrocker.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1002061524280.11458@simone.lan>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01PgdxPqdo36N/dMWgqi2xfOSxpH+SmKEts3I=; token_authority=support@its.sussex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Sussex: true
X-Sussex-transport: remote_smtp
Subject: Re: [Asrg] We really don't need no stinkin IMAP or POP foram button to M
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 11:59:42 -0000

--On 6 February 2010 15:38:04 -0500 John R Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>
> I really don't understand all the resistance to a header applied by the
> MDA.  Yes, this will require a one-time change to the MDA, but you get a
> much more solid system that doesn't fail in mysterious ways when people
> have legitimate mail setups that happen to differ from the one the
> designer anticipated.  It's not unlike the advantage of DKIM over SPF.

If I see a message that I think is spam, and it carries a "report-abuse-to" 
header, how do I know that the header was added by the MDA and not by the 
spammer?

-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/