[Scspamcop] Re: General Spam Question

[David Bolt]

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Tim McGraw wrote:-

>David Bolt wrote:
>> Tim McGraw wrote:-
>>
>>> BCC recipients aren't revealed in the "TO" header or in any other
>>> headers BCC recipients might receive for obvious reasons.
>>  Unless the mailer is severely broken. I have received mail with a
>>nice
>> long BCC: header with over 50 addresses in it.
>
>Yowsa! Sounds like malware, and bad malware at that.

It was broken spamware. Not quite as broken as the ones that break part
way through the headers, and maybe not quite as broken as those that
can't parse their own templates[0], but still broken.

>>> As to what "Many systems will reject any email which has no "TO"
>>> recipient" means: some systems will not accept an email which has only
>>> BCC recipients.
>>  While others will let it pass through unmolested.
>
>I was made aware of the problem sending press releases to reporters and
>industry analysts who specifically requested the information. A
>postmaster at one of the trade journals responded to my query on their
>NDR and told me that's how they had set up their mail system.

That is about the dumbest way of doing things possible. Apart from the
fact that there are broken mail servers (Exchange) that replace the NDR
with a "helpful", and often incorrect, explanation, what on earth made
him think people are going to read an NDR because it might actually
contain the reply? He didn't have to wear a pair of earphones attached
to an auto-reversing tape that just played "breathe in, breathe out"
continually, did he?


[0] The number of times I get spams with place-holders that haven't been
filled in is amusing in a sad sort of way.

Regards,
        David Bolt

-- 
Team Acorn: http://www.distributed.net/ OGR-P2 @ ~100Mnodes RC5-72 @ ~15Mkeys
                 | SUSE 10.1 32bit  | openSUSE 10.2 32bit | openSUSE 10.3 32bit
SUSE 10.0 64bit  | SUSE 10.1 64bit  | openSUSE 10.2 64bit |
RISC OS 3.11     | RISC OS 3.6      | TOS 4.02            | openSUSE 10.3 PPC