[Mailman-Users] specific (1) LHS and (2) sender rules to frustrate spam/phishing

[Rich Kulawiec]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 01:25:15PM -0700, John W. Baxter wrote:
> I wasn't referring to sender verification callbacks (which we do not use).
> I was referring to recipient verification callforwards, where the edge MTA
> doesn't know valid recipients but some internal (or even customer) MTA does.
> Exim can configure these easily (but that doesn't help because Mailman
> doesn't act like an MTA).  I don't know about any other MTAs in this regard.

Ah, understood.  *Those* I highly approve of, since they at least help
mitigate accept-then-bounce issues due to non-existent recipient addresses
at the final/internal/destination MTA.  Whether it's done by callforwards,
or LDAP lookups, or script-generated virtual user tables, or aliases, or
whatever, I'm all for it.

---Rsk