On Dec 30, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial > > software. > There's nothing more anti-social in sender verification than in any other > similar check - if someone sends mail from an address that cannot be > delivered to, I don't want to accept it, because I can't deliver a reply to > them. If they want to talk to me, but won't accept replies from me, who > exactly is antisocial there? For a start that sites performing sender verification will partecipate in a DDoS on the mail infrastructure of domains forged by spammers. It's just as simple as this. Sender verification is barely less harmful than C/R schemes and antivirus advertisements^Wnotices.
Also, sender verification when seen from the side of the victims is indistinguishable from a dictionary attack, and may cause deliverability issues to the hosts attempting it. On Dec 30, Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And if you would simply read the mail you would understand that this is > a per-user setting. If you dont like it - dont use it. And if you would simply read the mail you would understand that this is not relevant. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
