>>To me this seems "fairer" than wrapping the message alone, because the 
>>forwarding server now takes on the burden of the reputation hit for that 
>>message. >>Eventually, enough viagra messages will be forwarded that the 
>>forwarder can't get any mail delivered anywhere.

That’s on the responsibility of the receiver, to not "report as spam" in their 
final mailbox, but in their forwarding account. After all, its they that 
configured the forwarding server to forward email to their account.
Its correct that the forwarder takes the responsibility of the forwarded 
message, as it should be.

Note that a forwarding server doesn't forward to anything else than local 
accounts with a external redirect configured, meaning they will not become a 
"open relay" and become a spam problem itself. So everyone "behind" the 
forwarder should expect the mail.

That’s the whole point of wrapping or rewriting, taking over the complete 
responsibility for the message so no SPF, DKIM or DMARC alignments fails.

The forwarder can also do their own spam filtering on incoming messages before 
forwarding them to a user that has a forward configured, to prevent tripping 
any automatic spam reputation systems at the receiver.

If a forwarder forwards a email to a mailbox for which it has no authority 
over, the forwarder is bad and deserves bad reputation, unless the forwarder 
received implicit opt-in, for example, by a user being a employee or member of 
some group list or similar, or if the user has a implicit trust. (some 
"incorrect forwards" are just human mistakes and easy to resolve once that user 
complains of receiving for example employee-only internal "news" email for some 
company, then they will ask why they get that and "ooh, that employee has a 
incorrect email set up, ill fix that").

_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Reply via email to