[Greylist-users] Empty MAIL FROM:

Evan Harris eharris at puremagic.com
Fri Aug 22 13:58:08 PDT 2003

If you're not accepting mail from <>, then you're not in compliance with RFC
821.  Read section 3.6 and 4.1.1.

Spammers have tended to abuse the use of the null address, but since it is
also used for legitimate mail notifications, I would not recommend bouncing
them.  Use other methods.


On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, richard at stardate.ca wrote:

> I am noticing that there are a lot of  "MAIL FROM: <>" coming through.
> My understanding of RFC 821 section 3.1 is that a valid email address is
> required here.  Any messages that were devoid of a return path address I
> was refusing to accept.  The problem here is that there are a lot of non
> spam emails where the address is empty, that I had to start accepting
> these emails.  I think this will open the door to letting some spam
> through.
> Thoughts on that.
> When I was bouncing these messages, the sender was getting notified of
> the bounce, so the sendeng MTA must have the return address????

More information about the Greylist-users mailing list