On 26.04.18 13:41, L A Walsh wrote:
To my way of thinking, dropping someone else's email,
telling the sender the email is being rejected for having
spam-like characteristics and telling the recipient nothing
seems like it might have legal liability for the for the
user potentially missing vital email.
Refusing to take a mail is not dropping. Noone is required by any means to
accept anything because there may be many reasons a mail can't be accepted.
For example, mail server that it out of disk space cannot accept a mail thus
the only possibility is to refuse accepting it.
Dropping mail is the case where mailserver accepts mail and does not deliver
it, nor send a bounce.
It also would seem to violate what used to be a basic expectation of
internet email -- that it is either delivered
to the recipient's inbox OR you'll receive a
non-delivery notification (a "bounce").
I have no idea where did you get this expectation - your assumption is
false. Nearly (if not completely) all mailservers tend to refuse accept mail
even from the client, if:
- the mail is over allowed size
- the sending address is invalid, undeliverable or forged
- the mail contains virus, phish, malware or otherwise dangerous content
especially in the case the sending address is invalid or undeliverable, it
is impossible impossible to send bounce to the sending address.
When the address is forged, those bounces would go to a innocent victim.
There are many reasons why mailserver (even your submission server) could
refuse message.
If your submission server accepts a message, it of course SHOULD send a
bounce when the recipient's server refuses it (exemptions named above)
Note that in this case the recipients server refuses to handle a message,
and instead of bouncing, sending the bounce is up to your submission server.
I hope some of those who think it was a good practice to
delete a user's email (because they think it is malware)
might rethink that practice.
I hope you now understand what is the difference between deleting and
refusing a mail and won't blame us for way how mail system works (and always
worked), just because you have misunderstood (or assumed) it.
I didn't realize email was no longer considered unreliable
afaik e-mail was NEVER considered reliable, mostly because of reasons
mentioned above.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
"The box said 'Requires Windows 95 or better', so I bought a Macintosh".
