Author: Chris Bayliss Date: To: Nigel Metheringham CC: exim-users, Sean Hoggard, David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [exim] Newbie spam bounce retries question (without disclaimer)
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 02:48:54PM +0100, Nigel Metheringham wrote: > On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 14:42 +0100, Sean Hoggard wrote:
> > Thanks for the advice, I did wonder if this might be the case, I'm
> > afraid I do need to bounce messages though, my spam filter sometimes
> > identifies mails as spam when they are genuine, in this case the
> > sender needs to know there is a problem.
> >
> > Most spam messages have false addresses anyway, it's usually virus
> > infected mails that sometimes have forged addresses in and I don't
> > bounce those messages.
>
> This is why you *must* reject them at SMTP time. Sending out bounces
> later probably breaks the computer misuse act.
Its extremely unlikely that generating any sort of non delivery report
would break the computer misuse act. I can find no mention of Non
delivery reports in it at all - have I missed an amendment somewhere
along the way? However, throwing people's legitimate communications
away must surely break the Human Rights Act (schedule 1 article 8,
paragraph 1).
Its all down to a matter of balance between running a reliable mail
service and not generating spurious bounces.
