Re: [exim] RFC on accepting mail to return path addresses

On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 11:00 +0100, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> What is the opinion of the masses, am I right to reject mail to return
> paths if they don't come from <> or postmaster?

Yes, technically you're probably right -- those callouts are broken. But
you probably don't lose much by accepting them either. The reverse-path
addresses are time-limited anyway; they're not going to be getting much
spam. The important part is that you reject MAIL FROM:<> to your 'raw'
address. Rejecting mail with non-empty reverse-path to your signed
addresses isn't really that important, so if it's a problem you might as
well relax the checking.

It's worth reporting the problem to the offending sites though.

--
dwmw2