1998-03-17 - Re: Will New Sendmail Block Remailers?

Header Data

From: “Robert A. Hayden” <rhayden@means.net>
To: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Message Hash: 02dcfdb3ad1fed5d955da0e99f56e45390af6bd7f6b6f40eb528df35ffb5e57b
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.980317085417.19255A-100000@geek.net>
Reply To: <>
UTC Datetime: 1998-03-17 14:57:14 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 06:57:14 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: "Robert A. Hayden" <rhayden@means.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 06:57:14 -0800 (PST)
To: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Will New Sendmail Block Remailers?
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.980317085417.19255A-100000@geek.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, John Young wrote:

> Markoff in the NYT reports today on the release of a new 
> Sendmail upgrade by author Eric Allman that will block 
> spam by checking the legitimacy of the originating address 
> before delivery.
> The report claims that spam is up to 10% of e-mail worldwide,
> And that Sendmail is used on 75% of the computers that route 
> e-mail, all of which are being fitted with the new program.
> What are the chances that this will affect remailers or other 
> means of eternal anonymity?

Depends on how the remailer is set up.

For example, I own the domain "geek.net".  If I set up a remailer and
messages resolve to "anonymous@geek.net", I suspect it will get through. 
I may need to also have an alias that /dev/nulls messages to
anonymous@geek.net, but that is still a legitimate mailing address. 

I think what they are trying to stop are spammers that have a return
address like "fakename@fakedomain.com" or "your@best.friend".  Those
wouldn't resolve and would just get shitcanned.

IMHO, there's nothing _toooo_ sinister here, yet.  But vigilance is
Robert Hayden			rhayden@means.net	       UIN: 3937211
IP Network Administrator	http://rhayden.means.net
MEANS Telcom			(612) 230-4416