- ... Well someone has to start implementing the standards correctly or there is no point in making them anyway.Message 1 of 31 , Jan 2, 2013View SourceAm 03.01.2013 04:06, schrieb Reindl Harald:
> Am 03.01.2013 04:02, schrieb Michael Blessenohl:Well someone has to start implementing the standards correctly or there
>> I tried using an e-mail address "@"@... in postfix. When I try to deliver a mail to it, postfix rejects it
>> with the error message
>> 501 5.1.3 Bad recipient address syntax (state 13)
>> I defined an alias, so in theory it should work. The recipient address is totally valid as far as I know and as far
>> as online validators tell
> why are you try using such addresses?
> it does not matter what some validators or even any RFC says
> special chars should not be used because ANY relay-hop has
> to accept used senders and RCPT or your email will not get
> delivered finally
> means: even if you can configure YOUR postfix you will
> not be able to do it for the rest of the world
> "0-9" and "a-z" are the safe chars
is no point in making them anyway.
- ... Come on, don t be so naive. The backup MX scenario is an EXAMPLE of how @ in local-part can result in trouble. The same problem may happen in ANY piece ofMessage 31 of 31 , Jan 4, 2013View SourceMichael Blessenohl:
> The security issue is, as far as I understand, that a backup MX uses anCome on, don't be so naive. The backup MX scenario is an EXAMPLE
> @ in the local part for internal purposes. Which, in theory, can be
> exploited to use the server as open relay. As long as I don't use a
> backup MX, I don't have an open relay and everything is fine, isn't it?
of how @ in local-part can result in trouble. The same problem may
happen in ANY piece of software that decisions based on the content
of an email address.