[107429] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ingress SMTP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Champeon)
Wed Sep 3 14:20:22 2008
X-Received-From: schampeo@tabasco.hesketh.com
X-Delivered-To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 14:20:12 -0400
From: Steven Champeon <schampeo@hesketh.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20080903171541.B7E547808@relayer.avian.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
on Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 05:15:41PM +0000, *Hobbit* wrote:
> Related question, now that some discussion has started: why the F
> does Gmail refuse to put real, identifiable injection-path headers
> in mail they relay out? The current "policy" only protects spammer
> identities behind a meaningless 10.x and is completely at odds with
> what almost every other freemail provider does, which of course
> breaks any receiving-end model. Who's here from Google that I can
> chat with about this?
Dunno who's here from Google, but every time I've asked about this (as
the basis for a discussion of why they do such a sucky job of blocking
419 scams, which we otherwise block by injection point analysis) I've
been told that it's a "privacy" issue. I long suspected it was just a
side effect of an inflexible network architecture, but have been assured
that, no, it's the privacy issue.
And yes, this is completely at odds with the fact that they *do* put
injection point IP audit trail into mail they relay via SMTP.
In the end, it's an idiotic policy, and I hope they wake up and fix it.
In the meantime, I'm reporting every 419 scam I get from them.
--
hesketh.com/inc. v: +1(919)834-2552 f: +1(919)747-9073 w: http://hesketh.com/
antispam news, solutions for sendmail, exim, postfix: http://enemieslist.com/
