[SURBL-Discuss] Strange Bounce [Was: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender]

Martin G. Diehl mdiehl at nac.net
Fri Jun 3 15:25:57 CEST 2005


Why would someone (for example, mailto:nico.prenzel at pn-systeme.de )
signup to an eMail list ... and then require authentication?

Just curious ...

IMO, if you don't want eMail, don't signup to an active eMail list.

-------- Message With Full Headers --------
From: - Tue May 31 07:28:42 2005
X-UIDL: 1117523571.M110438P38333.mx6.oct
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: mdiehl at nac.net
Received: (qmail 38071 invoked by uid 0); 31 May 2005 07:12:36 -0000
Received: from 81.169.145.166 by mx6.oct (envelope-from <>, uid 0) with qmail-scanner-1.25  (clamuko: 0.72.   Clear:RC:0(81.169.145.166):.  Processed in 0.244881 secs); 31 May 2005 07:12:36 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: via mx6.oct
X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.25 (Clear:RC:0(81.169.145.166):. Processed in 0.244881 secs)
Received: from unknown (HELO natnoddy.rzone.de) (81.169.145.166)  by rbl-mx6.oct.nac.net with SMTP; 31 May 2005 07:12:35 -0000
Received: from szpn0002 (p213.54.179.94.tisdip.tiscali.de [213.54.179.94]) by post.webmailer.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4V7CXPC014589 for <mdiehl at nac.net>; Tue, 31 May 2005 09:12:34 +0200 (MEST)
Received: by szpn0002 (Postfix)	id 996CE474E0; Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: MAILER-DAEMON at szpn0002.pn-systeme.de (Mail Delivery System)
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
To: mdiehl at nac.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;	boundary="04F23A26C6.1117523126/szpn0002"
Message-Id: <20050531070526.996CE474E0 at szpn0002>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on spamd2.oct
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-PrefsFile: nac.net/mdiehl
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.6 required=4.7 tests=RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,	RAZOR2_CHECK autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2

Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: MAILER-DAEMON at szpn0002.pn-systeme.de (Mail Delivery System)
To: mdiehl at nac.net

This is the Postfix program at host szpn0002.

I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be
be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.

For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the attached returned message.

			The Postfix program

<nico.prenzel at pn-systeme.de>: host 192.168.101.1[192.168.101.1] said: 530
     Authentication required (in reply to MAIL FROM command)

Reporting-MTA: dns; szpn0002
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 04F23A26C6
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; mdiehl at nac.net
Arrival-Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 07:59:06 +0200 (CEST)

Final-Recipient: rfc822; nico.prenzel at pn-systeme.de
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host 192.168.101.1[192.168.101.1] said: 530
     Authentication required (in reply to MAIL FROM command)

Subject: Re: Blogger attacks SURBL
From:    "Martin G. Diehl" <mdiehl at nac.net>
Date:    Tue, 31 May 2005 02:02:20 -0400
To:      Jeff Chan <jeffc at surbl.org>
CC:      SURBL Discuss <discuss at lists.surbl.org>, SpamAssassin Users <users at spamassassin.apache.org>

Jeff Chan wrote:

 > Pardon the dramatic title, but hopefully it got your attention.
 >
 > This guy's domain got listed by Outblaze, we removed it, and as
 > thanks this guy paints us as irresponsible.  Please help us
 > straighten him out, gently:
 >
 > http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/weblog/comments/blacklisting_blogs/
 >
 > I gave it my shot.
 >
 > Jeff C.
 > --
 > Don't harm innocent bystanders.

The way I read his response is that he stands against
SPAM and in favor of anti SPAM measures ...

*provided* he is not inconvenienced.

-- 
Martin


More information about the Discuss mailing list