Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:00:42 +0100 From: Erwin Lansing <harvester@fnidder.dk> To: Toomas Aas <toomas.aas@raad.tartu.ee> Cc: Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testinf for open relays Message-ID: <20020204100042.G94814@mail.droso.net> In-Reply-To: <200202040855.g148tkS21725@lv.raad.tartu.ee>; from toomas.aas@raad.tartu.ee on Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 10:55:17AM %2B0200 References: <20020203190151.B69657-100000@deckard.addix.net> <20020203205910.GA2654@raggedclown.net> <200202040855.g148tkS21725@lv.raad.tartu.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 10:55:17AM +0200, Toomas Aas wrote: > Hi Cliff! > > On 3 Feb 02 at 21:59 you wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 08:23:21PM +0100, Olaf Hoyer wrote: > > > > > Some public utilities, including rlytest, or spamlart, actually only look > > > at the responses in the dialog, but for testing if a relay may be used for > > > spam, I need to have a look if this really will relay or drops the message > > > after accepting it. > > > So what is it you are trying to prove ? That they send a reject message, > > but secretly accept the message and relay it ? > > I think he means exactly the opposite - that some servers 'seem' to > accept the message but do not actually relay it. This is true for several MTA's, e.g. Novell Groupwise. -- Erwin Lansing -- http://droso.org fingerprint = FB58 9797 299A F18E 2D3E 73D6 AB2F 5A5B 1525 6990 "Show me a web app that can't be served from a Pentium 100 and I'll show you a dead dot-com" -- Kevin Jamieson [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8Xk26qy9aWxUlaZARAiT8AJsFw25l+7a9BAcW9JpdkT+Q93ik5QCghuPG yz3ws35QEN5vQXK44pE7I18= =RUKc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020204100042.G94814>