Re: [exim] Are we being harsh

On 4/4/2005 4:01, "Ron McKeating" <R.J.Mckeating@???> wrote:

> We have a complain because we rejected an email that looked like a
> forged hello, here is our log entry
>
> 2005-04-02 16:02:44 H=mail1.gov.im (KEWAIGUE.mailsec) [217.23.170.232]
> rejected EHLO or HELO kewaigue.mailsec: Forged HELO: constructed by
> viruses KEWAIGUE.mailsec

Well, it depends on your needs. If you are running a mail server with
paying customers who expect their incoming messages to work, and the
government of the Isle of Man wants to send your customers stuff, then
you're being too harsh.

If you're running your server for yourself and don't care about the
government of the Isle of Man sending you mail, then this is OK.

And if you're running a corporate server, the powers that be can set the
policy (depending again on their need to get mail from said government).

I've found that governments are the entities least likely to fix invalid
aspects of their email operation. But perhaps Washington state is
particularly bad.

Oddly, im wasn't in the country code list I got from ISO several years
ago...it's probably time to get a new list. (When we add a header about
mail from a suspect country, we include the name based on that list.)

And please folks...we don't need yet another debate about HELO/EHLO text and
blocking. The lists archives are already perhaps 10% heavier than they
would be without those past threads. Everything that can possibly be said
has been said.

--John