Re: tlug: Re: Test messages: Where's good?

[Scott Perlman <perlman@example.com>]

Umm, 

do we _really_ want an easy and helpfull way for spammers to verify
that all their headers are perfect?

methinks therin lies your abuse potential
oThe only saving grace you've ogt is reply goes to tcp/ip address by 
teh TCP/IP packet layer, but that may not be a valid mail recipient.
The case of people needing this are likely those behind firewalls and
such  where a straightforward configuration isn't available.

-Scott

Stephen J. Turnbull did state upon Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 02:01:19PM +0900:
> >>>>> "Chris" == Chris Sekiya <chris@example.com> writes:
> 
>     Chris> On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>     >> Not that I know of.  Might be a good tlug project ;-)
> 
>     Chris> I don't even want to contemplate the potential for abuse of
>     Chris> that service ...
> 
> "I'm shocked," ... um, yeh, did that one yesterday.  Sorry.
> 
> Anyway, it would be listening on a port != 25 and nobody is thinking
> of hanging _sendmail_ off that port---sendmail doesn't log the
> transaction the way we'd want it, does it?  (Ah, sendmail ... surely
> there's a configuration option.)  Any message body goes to /dev/hell,
> reply goes to the IP address provided by the TCP/IP layer.
> 
> Go ahead, contemplate away.  I wanna see how you get a root shell on
> my machine if I set that up.  It'd be a learning experience.  :-)

-- 
It's times like this that I realize today could have been avoided 
entirely had I just not bothered getting up this morning.
Scott perlman@example.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Next Technical Meeting: February 13 (Sat), 12:30 place: Temple Univ.
** presentation: XEmacs, by Steven Baur and Martin Buchholz
Next Nomikai: March 19 (Fri), 19:30   Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
-------------------------------------------------------------------
more info: http://tlug.linux.or.jp                     Sponsor: PHT