Hmm maybe I'm simplifying this too much, but couldn't spam be reduced/prevented by disallowing forged headers?
It's far too easy to create a custom header that overrides the actual header. Why can't the mail server developers prevent this :( ...then at least you could track the senders. I just got this:
Delivered-To: me@here.com
Received: (qmail 12002 invoked from network); 25 May 2003 15:43:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO test.com) (61.237.17.147)
by 0 with SMTP; 25 May 2003 15:43:17 -0000
From: =?GB2312?B?sLLGvcjtvP4=?= <anpingsof@test.com>
Subject:
=?GB2312?B?x+stxPotytQt08OjurCyLca9LbLWLbncLc31LcjtLbz+OjQwMC4wMCDUqg==?=
To: me@here.com
Content-Type: text/html;charset="GB2312"
Reply-To: anpingsof@test.com
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:42:12 +0800
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
It's far too easy to create a custom header that overrides the actual header. Why can't the mail server developers prevent this :( ...then at least you could track the senders. I just got this:
Quote:
Return-Path: <anpingsof@test.com> Delivered-To: me@here.com
Received: (qmail 12002 invoked from network); 25 May 2003 15:43:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO test.com) (61.237.17.147)
by 0 with SMTP; 25 May 2003 15:43:17 -0000
From: =?GB2312?B?sLLGvcjtvP4=?= <anpingsof@test.com>
Subject:
=?GB2312?B?x+stxPotytQt08OjurCyLca9LbLWLbncLc31LcjtLbz+OjQwMC4wMCDUqg==?=
To: me@here.com
Content-Type: text/html;charset="GB2312"
Reply-To: anpingsof@test.com
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 23:42:12 +0800
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000