On Wed, 14 Jan 1998, Sherwood Botsford wrote:
> Being generally a bit of a beeblebrain, I set the following
> option:
> sender_reject = "^[0-9]*@*"
>
> And of course my server was saying "No you don't" to everyone.
>
> What I wanted was
> sender_reject = "^[0-9]+@.*"
>
> to reject such senders as
>
> 3448383@???
> and
> 2277712@???
>
> So far my experience has been that no numbered account has
> sent valid mail.
Caution: some sites use all numeric local parts. If you want to be a
bit more cautious use ^\d{8}@.*$ instead, which looks for 8 digit local
parts. Many common bulk e-mail packages use random 8 digit local parts.
Also, AOL guarrentees that no local part at aol.com will begin with a
digit, so you may have to have a ^\d.*@aol\.com$ too, as sometimes I see
stuff like 3jack@??? being used.
I see hundreds of rejections a day from these rules. Some stupid MTAs
don't understand 5xx codes too well, and retry though. 5.5MB rejectlog
yesterday which is down from the usual 10+MB...
> Sherwood Botsford | email avatar@???
> Sorcerers Apprentice | Office CAB 642B
> System Administrator | Tel: 403 492 5728
> Trouble shooter | Fax: 403 492 6826
Tom
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
