Well, in fact, my concern is that exim logged response to "MAIL
FROM:<>" when it should have logged reponse to "RCPT TO:
<whatever@???>". By no means the server could have answered
before I gave the "RCPT TO" command. Furthermore, as the RCPT seems a
correct address exim uses, I see no reason the remote server isn't
answering correctly to SMTP protocol.
On 2/10/2006, "Brent Clark" <bclark@???> wrote:
>Renaud Allard wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am now using exim 4.60, and I noticed something quite strange to me in
>> the logs when doing sender verification. Here is the relevant log line:
>>
>> 2006-02-09 11:38:28 H=c-24-63-184-85.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.63.184.85]
>> sender verify fail for <yyrutebjkuwpbh@???>: response to
>> "MAIL FROM:<>" from calligate2.cali.co.uk [62.172.47.141] was: 550
>> 5.1.1 <mail.llorien.org-1139481506-testing@???> is not a
>> valid mailbox
>>
>> However, how could the server possibly have answered "not a valid
>> mailbox" at "MAIL FROM: <>" step?
>>
>> If I do it by hand, I just get:
>> telnet calligate2.cali.co.uk 25
>> Trying 62.172.47.141...
>> Connected to calligate2.cali.co.uk.
>> Escape character is '^]'.
>> 220 digest2.cali.co.uk ESMTP server ready (Alligate v1.5.11.16-267.1-1.23)
>> helo mail.llorien.org
>> 250 digest2.cali.co.uk
>> mail from: <>
>> 250 OK
>> rcpt to: <mail.llorien.org-1139481506-testing@???>
>> 550 5.1.1 <mail.llorien.org-1139481506-testing@???> is
>> not a valid mailbox
>>
>> Which seems ok. However Exim logged it from "MAIL FROM:" step.
>>
>
>Hi
>
>I dont know much, about spam etc, but either this is a new spam technic and sender verify does not
>handle it correctly, or worse, I think its a mis-confgured or crappy MTA (Alligate) that does not
>follow simple SMTP rules.
>
>Wonder if we cant tighen our sender / callback verify more?
>
>Kind Regards
>Brent Clar
