Re: There needs to be an international policy

From: N. Miller (anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 04/08/05 

Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:38:35 -0700

In article <Oc99iiFPFHA.3356@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>, says...

> "N. Miller" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cbfc40d3ef487de98a787@msnews.microsoft.com...
> > In article <e#cSqq#OFHA.3388@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, George Hester says...

> > > Like I said 90% from China Korea and Brasil

> > Your dictionary is broken. Obviously your "from" is not the same as the
> > standard English "from". The only way I can tell where any email is "from"
> > is to look at the headers which tell me "Received: from * by *".

> No those are the "relay servers" used along the way, not the real source.
> That is one of the well known facts about Spam is that you really can't know
> from the Header where it is from.

Those are not "relay servers", they are proxy clients. The only connection
that they have with the SMTP service is that they inject the message into
that service. Technically, any open proxy connecting to my MTA is a "Message
Submission Agent". The message has not touched an SMTP server before the
proxy that connects to my server.

And you are right about the source being masked. You can no more claim that
the url in the spam body is the "source", than you can claim that a ham
radio is the "source". However, from the standpoint of the SMTP mail system,
the "source" of an message is the "Message Submission Agent"; and, as shown
by any of a number of DNSBLs, and I use both SORBS and NJABL, among others,
the proxy sources are often U.S. HSI provider's cluelessly negligent
customers. 

-- 
Norman
~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint

Relevant Pages