full-disclosure - Apparently the practice was prevalent

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20040211190032.GA3948@josefina.dcit.cz>
From: martin.macok at underground.cz (Martin Mačok)
Subject: Apparently the practice was prevalent

On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 01:50:22PM -0000, John.Airey@...b.org.uk wrote:

> RFC 821 and 822 were inadequate even before April 2001.

You told that *anyone who does not have an "open" email relay is in
breach of this RFC*. I'm asking you to prove it.

RFC 821          SIMPLE MAIL TRANSFER PROTOCOL           August 1982

   3.6.  RELAYING

[..]

                      ...  The receiver-SMTP may accept or reject the
      task of relaying the mail in the same way it accepts or rejects
      mail for a local user.

[..]

Just tell me *where exactly* RFC 821 enforces receiver-SMTP to accept
and deliver every message. Which part of this RFC is receiver-SMTP
breaching when it rejects to "open relay" some message?

Martin Ma?ok