Re: [ietf-smtp] DSNs

[Sam Varshavchik <[e-mail]>]

Laura Atkins writes:

> Forwarding can happen before the message hits the recipient’s mailbox (sieve,  
> procmail). Also, recipients may have per-user filters to /dev/null mail,  
> before the MUA gets it or afterwards - most MUAs allow for blocking. Often,  
> these are solutions implemented to avoid harassment or abuse and there is a  
> significant security / escalation risk for the people implementing the blocks  
> if the blocks are discovered. 

I only dimly recall, a very, very long time ago, seeing precursors to modern  
DSNs that included the exact details of what procmail did with a given  
message. This was long before DSNs were standardized.

I have not seen any modern DSN that spills the guts to such a detail. All  
the ones that I've seen, that follow the current spec (to varying degrees)  
say nothing more than the mail was delivered (or not) to such and such E- 
mail address without going into the details as to where exactly the mail  
wound up, in the actual INBOX, or trash.

I do agree that I don't /quite/ see the value-added to the recipient of  
implementing success DSNs. Or any DSNs, for that matter. If the receiving  
mail server does not want the email it should reject it instead of accepting  
it and generate a failure DSN. So, neither success nor failure DSNs really  
have any value to the receiving party. But I do not see any security issue  
with DSNs themselves, as specified.