Date : Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:30:43 +0100 (BST)
From : Ian Rawlings <ianr@...>
Subject: Re: Broken message headers on this mailing list
On 29 Apr 2002, Jonathan Graham Harston wrote:
> There is no Reply-To header, and the From header lists the author, viz:
> From: "Mark de Weger" <mark@...>
Mildly annoying but not a major issue, I just CC messages to "bbc", alias
I have set up.
> Also, the To: header does not specify the recipient. My mail server
> is about to move to a system of silently destroying all emails that do
> not specify the actual recipent in the To: header, as they look like
> spam.
No, they look like mailing list messages. Your spam filters are lazy and
broken. I would suggest you use a different mail provider.
> You may comment that I should use a different mail provideder. NO!
Doh!!
> I *WANT* messages that look as though they are spam to be destroyed.
> It is the responsibility of responsible message generators that are
> not spam to ensure they do not look like spam.
That's not possible, anything passing via the email system looks like spam
to a sufficiently duff filtering system. I have spam that has a valid
from: and a to: that has my address in it.
Seriously, filtering on "To:" fields is duff. Similarly, doing domain
lookups on From: fields and even the Sender: field is also completely
duff. If your ISP subscribed to the antispamming services available to
ISPs (such as the RBL and MAPS) then they'd get on a lot better but
they're obviously too cheap for that.
> As I've already mentioned, the To: header should have my email address
> in it, otherwise it is defined as being spam.
Tosh. Sorry, but that is total tosh. These messages are not spam and yet
don't have your name in the To: field, in fact every mailing list I'm on
does not have my name in the To: field and yet they too are not spam. As
for the spam I have, that *does* have my name in the To: field.
What is broken here is your perception of how to filter spam.
--
For every expert, there is an equal but opposite expert.