Sender Address Verification

[Jason Ede]

In short, if you must use it then only use it for recipient address verification. I.e. only accept email you can deliver to a valid mailbox and make sure you don’t have any catchalls on domains.

Jason

From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Mail Admin
Sent: 13 July 2009 17:42
To: 'MailScanner discussion'
Subject: RE: Sender Address Verification

Thanks for your comments. I will search the list and review the way I use it and re-think my strategy.
Kind Regards

From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Hostmaster
Sent: 13 July 2009 16:35
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: RE: Sender Address Verification

>I recently deployed the smf-sav, which works quite well. It takes a lot of load off mailscanner.
>I recently got listed on backscatter because I have used it on one of “their” members so it seems.
>Looking on their Web Site it seems there is nothing I can do only pay them 50 euro to get delisted, and then what happens if I do >sav again?

>Have any of the list had this issue, with smf-sav?  Is there anything that can be done from your experience? I do not want to turn >off smf-sav.

>Thanks to you all

I am assuming you mean you have been listed at backscatterer.org...

I must admit that I find something particularly distasteful about being on the receiving end of sender validation lookups, especially considering that some of our servers receive email for domains which they do not send email for. In my opinion, nobody should rely on someone else’s resources (memory and CPU time) to work out if they should accept an email, and I guess that the Backscatter blacklist was built on this basis – their sender callout policy is here - http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=sendercallouts and I have to say that I agree with all points.

I am pretty sure that this has been discussed on-list before and that some people have very strong feelings in both ways regarding callouts, so it might be worth searching the list archives for further info on the subject.
Best Regards,
Richard






All E-Mail communications are monitored in addition to being content checked for malicious codes or viruses. The success of scanning products is not guaranteed, therefore the recipient(s) should carry out any checks that they believe to be appropriate in this respect.

This message (including any attachments and/or related materials) is confidential to and is the property of Computer Service Centre, unless otherwise noted. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.

Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Computer Service Centre.

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be clean.

This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee(s) and is strictly confidential. The unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, or any information it contains is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and then permanently delete it. Although we make every effort to keep our systems free from viruses, you should check this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses as we cannot accept any liability for viruses inadvertently transmitted by use.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20090713/76fe3a11/attachment.html