Eli wrote:
>
> Ian Toogood wrote:
> > I know this is an old thread, but I'm having the same problem with >
> MX's that reject MAIL FROM: <> being blocked
> >
> > Was there anything resolved regarding this issue - the callout >
> verification stops a LOT of spam, and I am unwilling to turn it off >
> > Maintaining a whitelist is time consuming and not practical - our >
> users are getting very upset when legit mail is stopped because of >
> this
>
> Just to drop my 2 cents worth (I'm not really following this thread), if
> the real problem is that you can't do a callout verification on a null
> sender because so many servers seem to be rejecting it, could you not
> just do something like this in your acls:
>
> deny message = sender verification failed - sucks to be
> you. !sender = :
> !verify = sender/callout
>
The problem is not mail comming in from null senders, it is with all those
silly mail admins who think all 'mail from: <>' is bad and thus do not
accept 'bounce' messages into there systems. This causes the callout to
fail, and thus exim rejects the sender address.
> Or whatever it is - the idea being that you're not going to do a
> verification check on a null sender - it will be accepted. This is
> hopefully what the problem is (incoming bounce message with null sender
> - and you're doing a callout verification on it)? If so, I'd assume
> this would solve the problems since you should technically always accept
> a null sender even if the server sending it doesn't want to.
>
> Or I could be entirely off base with what this thread is about - in
> which case ignore me :)
>
> Eli.
>
>
> --
>
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim
> details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
--
--EAL--
