RFC822 minimum requirements
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: RFC822 minimum requirements

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    420

    RFC822 minimum requirements

    Hi All,

    I'm receiving spam that does not meet RFC822 minimum requirements which means the sender is blank. Does anyone know a trick to block messages in outlook that do not meet the RFC822 minimum requirements? I played a little with rules but nothing jumped out. Please note in this scenario it is mail I am recieving from my ISP (personal e-mail account). From what I see in google a lot of people have experiance this but no one knows of a way to block it. I do forward as attachments all the messages to the missed-spam addresss and abuse address of my ISP. I have requested the ISP block mails that qualifiy but so far it is not working. The only spam I receive comes in this format and I would love to write a rule to block it. Posted in ms security since I would like to block it using outlook but it is a symthom of a much larger problem and people with other clients are experiancing the same issue.

    Thanks,
    -D
    If you spend more on coffee than on IT security, you will be hacked. What\'s more, you deserve to be hacked.
    -- former White House cybersecurity adviser Richard Clarke

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    421
    Hi what every you do be sure NOT to block null senders at the server level...]
    To be more specific...at the listed MX for your domains.

    I thinks its RFC 1123 telling you to accept null senders for NDRs and whatnot.

    I have seen people get blacklisted for this..

    Just an FYI

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    420
    Originally posted here by ss2chef
    Hi what every you do be sure NOT to block null senders at the server level...]
    To be more specific...at the listed MX for your domains.

    I thinks its RFC 1123 telling you to accept null senders for NDRs and whatnot.

    I have seen people get blacklisted for this..

    Just an FYI
    Thanks for that but I am trying to block them at the client level (I am not a server Admin and I guess from what your saying the ISP can't just block the NULL sender). Is there a a way to do it as a client? Currently, I am using outlook 2k but if I different product supports that I would be tempted to switch. I'll be sure to read 1123.

    Cheers,
    -D
    If you spend more on coffee than on IT security, you will be hacked. What\'s more, you deserve to be hacked.
    -- former White House cybersecurity adviser Richard Clarke

  4. #4
    Senior Member Cemetric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    491
    This is a "dificult" topic (as far a blocking null senders go I mean)

    I "solved" it in outlook 2003 by working with safe senders and safe adresees(?)

    This way I never received a "null sender" again.

    I know it's not realy a solution but it helped me out ...

    Because the topic of blocking "null senders" will always be a hot one.

    As ss2chef mentioned the mailservers should'nt block "null senders" because A "null" from

    address is also the RFC standard address for bounce messages.

    If you block this, you might not know that some of your outgoing email could not be delivered

    ... I hope you find a way to block them ..if so let me know ...it might be beter than what I have now.
    Back when I was a boy, we carved our own IC's out of wood.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,100
    Greetings All:

    If you want to be REALLY cool, you'll ditch Outlook and go with Eudora. It's got built in junk mail filtering, rule based filtering, auto marks e-mails as flames (which is very useful for me, haha), and there's never been any viruses that attack it and use its address book to replicate itself to all of your friends.

    I've been using it non-stop since about 1997, and I can't recommend it highly enough. I have virtually every e-mail that i've ever sent or received since then still in active mailboxes, the archival and search features are second to none IMHO. The software is still under active development, and new features and upgrades are still released on a relatively regular basis.

    You can run it in sponsored mode (tiny little ad in the lower left), or you can pay to run it in registered mode.

    I've never been one of those "Microsoft is Evil" people. I use most every Microsoft product, and like most of them. However, I do believe that at least 2 of their products ARE evil. One being IIS, the other Outlook.

    For those interested: http://www.eudora.com/

  6. #6
    Senior Member Cemetric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    491
    I do believe that at least 2 of their products ARE evil. One being IIS, the other Outlook


    I do second you on that (especially on the IIS) but if you work for a firm that doesn't like words ending on *nux or *ix and swares with M$ you don't have much choice ... but thanks for the tip of Eudora ...I heard it was good but if your using it since '97 that shows some cunning programming to me

    Gr33tz
    Back when I was a boy, we carved our own IC's out of wood.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,255
    I second the vote for Eudora. Any time I've needed to check email on windows, I've used Eudora.
    Chris Shepherd
    The Nelson-Shepherd cutoff: The point at which you realise someone is an idiot while trying to help them.
    \"Well as far as the spelling, I speak fluently both your native languages. Do you even can try spell mine ?\" -- Failed Insult
    Is your whole family retarded, or did they just catch it from you?

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    40
    Although I have used Eudora for years as well, I've gotten the bug lately to try something new. Right now I'm using Mozilla Thunderbird, which also has rule-based filters, junk mail controls, and pretty good support for both mail and newsgroups -- which makes it the ideal Outlook Express replacement for me. The thing I like about it over Eudora is how much easier it seems to manage multiple email accounts, although that's not something I've played with much in Eudora.

    It's still young, so I guess the jury's still out on its place among its email client peers. I like it though.

    I post this little endorsement just because I read JV's post about Eudora above and went right into Thunderbird to see if I could create a filter for just this problem. Piece of cake.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    256
    While we are talking about anti-spam etc. I must give a plug to the company I work for...
    Give IhateSpam a shot...it too can be used with Outlook, Outlook Express, Eudora, and Incredimail...works with Hotmail as well.

    We are working on a build that will fully block the blank senders. We also have iHateSpam for Exchange servers as well.

    www.sunbelt-software.com
    Sex is like \"Social Security\". You get a little each month, but it\'s not enough to live on.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    59
    Why do you want to block it clientside?

    IhateSpam and SpamInspector are 2 good client side utilities.

    Although, We've found users take just as much time fooling with these client side programs as they would just moving the junk mail to the deleted items folder.
    Or they are constantly checking to make sure the programs didn't move a good email to the junk email folder.

    If junk mail is becoming a problem you should talk to your boss and have him relay it to the email admin. My best suggestion would be to change your email address.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 Security News

     Patches

       Security Trends

         How-To

           Buying Guides