On 13/07/2024 12:50, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
wrote:
Thanks a lot John and Peter!
In fact this is a family server, so it’s kinda important for us to not
miss emails. And it happened once that mails were not delivered
because of typos.
I was a bit worried about nasty consequences when it comes to
exploitation of using carchall. I just read Peter’s answer about it,
and he addresses exactly what I was concerned about: that having a
catchall would signal to the sender that an address exists, thus
inviting to spam on those addresses.
That said, I haven’t received a single spam on my catchall. I guess
I’ll keep using it until it proves itself more hassle than not, unless
there are strong reasons not to keep it.
Thanks a lot!
Hi Francis
while not the "general" practice there is nothing intrinsically bad
practice with accepting mail for non existent users, so long as you
don't automate a bounce process after accepting the email. This is one
of those cases were people say your mileage may vary. Being a family
server, your volumes of catchall mail are likely to be low anyway. The
biggest risk is of getting to read something you shouldn't have seen,
but if all the users know about the way it works that risk has been
accepted, at least by the recipients.
John
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
