[Mimedefang] Bouncing on invalid HELO/EHLO

G. Roderick Singleton gerry at pathtech.org
Thu Jun 12 11:36:01 EDT 2003


On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 11:22, Michael Sims wrote:
> Quoting "G. Roderick Singleton" <gerry at pathtech.org>:
> 
> > On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 10:09, Jim McCullars wrote:
> > > How many people actually bounce mail based on this rule?
> > > 
> [...]
> > My take on attempting to implement these types of tests was that is was
> > much work for little gain when one employs the latest sendmail with
> > mimedefang and ancillary programs such as spamassassin.
> 
> I have to respectfully disagree.  I have added, among other things, a check to
> make sure that the EHLO/HELO argument is a fully qualified domain name.  If it
> isn't, I increase the spam score of the message in question by 3 points.  This
> may seem drastic, but I tested this rule for a week and out of the 2000-3000
> message it caught, only about 3 of them were legitimate.  Other sites may have
> different results, a safer adjustment is probably 1.5 - 2, but 3 works well for me.
> 

[snipped]

Must be my way of saying things. What I meant was that with the
sendmail/MD/SA there is no reason to hack sendmail. And you just proved
it!!

ger ;-)
-- 
Gerry Roderick Singleton <gerry at pathtech.org>
416-452-4583




More information about the MIMEDefang mailing list