bugtraq - Re: Is predictable spam filtering a vulnerability?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:49:29 -0500
From: Jon Fiedler <jmf9@...u.edu>
To: dfs@...ringpenguin.com
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Is predictable spam filtering a vulnerability?


David F. Skoll wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, R Armiento wrote:
>
>  
>
>>However, 'C':s spam filter silently drops the email.
>>    
>>
>
>In my opinion, any spam filter that silently drops e-mail is broken, and
>is indeed a security risk.  A spam filter MUST respond with a 500 SMTP
>failure code if it rejects a message.
>
>Regards,
>
>David.
>  
>
This ignores client side spam filters, and doesn't really change the 
attack.  The 500 message would be sent back to A, but not B, so B is 
still in the dark about C not receiving the emails.

jon