Bounce button - Page 3

hadaso · 24 Oct 2002, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hadaso

So the question is: what is meant by "addresses the email(s) came from"?

OK I'll answer my own question:

I sent an email to "myself@fastmail#myself@hotmail", i.e. sent it from my fastmail account to my fastmail account with from address as my hotmail account. It arrived immediately and then I bounced it using the bounce button (

for the very first time!). Then I got a message "Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender" in the subject line in my hotmail account.

So DrStrabismus was right in saying : "it's more likely to go to an innocent third-party whose account is swamped with bounced spam". And it means it might be very inconsiderate to click "bounce" before making sure that the "From:" or "reply-to:" address in the header is where we want it to be bounced.

And it means the "bounce" button is not that cool feature I believed it to be when signing for a FastMail account! Oh well, I'm addicted by now.

The way it works, there's absolutely no need to keep it there!
(perhaps a good place for a redirect button? or print? or save?)

Here is the text of that message for anyone interested (without the attached original message bounced, and without my real address):

Code:

This is the Postfix program at host fastmail.fm.

I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned
below could not be delivered to one or more destinations.

For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the message returned below.

      The Postfix program

<myself<at>fastmail.fm>: data format error. Command output: myself: Mailbox does
not exist

 
Reporting-MTA: dns; fastmail.fm
Arrival-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002  8:44 PM

Final-Recipient: rfc822; myself<at>fastmail.fm
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; data format error. Command output: myself: Mailbox
does not exist

sjk · 24 Oct 2002, 07:01 AM

Hope this thread isn't becoming redundant to what was recently discussed in how good is FM's filter?...

hadaso · 24 Oct 2002, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sjk
Hope this thread isn't becoming redundant to what was recently discussed in how good is FM's filter?...

It is!

Jeremy Howard · 24 Oct 2002, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yuyo
I find the bounce button useful when you don't want to receive email from certain people. It may not deter spammers, but it makes it easy to convince what I call email intruders that they got the wrong address.

Please remember that some people, like Yuyo, find this feature useful.

To those who don't, feel free not to use it. However, please do not request that it be removed just because you don't use it yourself.

As I said earlier in this thread, we will not be removing this feature, but we do want to make it smarter in picking the correct From address when sending the bounce.

hadaso · 24 Oct 2002, 09:22 PM

Most of what is discussed here results from one imprecise term in the faq item describing the bounce buttton . It says "the addresses the email(s) came from" but the address used is something from the header that is not necessarily the real sender's address. This should be made more clear in the faq.
Personally I thought it meant that the SMTP protocol and servers' logs are somehow used to send an error message to the real sender's server, and then to the real sender's account.
I think that most people who use "bounce" to bounce spam don't realize that they might be overloading some poor victim's inbox! Most people wouldn't "bounce" spam if they realized this!
I agree that bounce has legitimate uses, but we need to know exactly what it does to use it corerectly. (and of course, it would be more useful if it used the "to:" address to designate the bouncing account, and used the server's logs to trace back the real sender, if it's at all possible).

Jeremy Howard · 24 Oct 2002, 09:36 PM

Good point--thanks. I'll try and clarify that FAQ entry.

hadaso · 24 Oct 2002, 09:42 PM

What about using the server's logs to trace back the real sender? Is that technically possible with SMTP?

spiderman · 24 Oct 2002, 10:06 PM

Good idea... Would it be possible to add the envelope's FROM field as an X-Envelope-From field?

DrStrabismus · 25 Oct 2002, 01:03 AM

The envelope "from" address is already in the "X-Mail-from" header where the information is available.

Although according to RFC 822 the "Return-Path" header is the "definitive information about the address and route back to the message's originator".

I don't like to say never, but I doubt there are many spam message where there is a difference between "X-Mail-from" , "Return-Path" and "From".

Jeremy Howard · 25 Oct 2002, 01:05 AM

We already add X-Mail-from and use it. However, it's normally forged in spams.

25 Oct 2002, 02:35 AM

I like the bounce button. I think it's a good way to blow-off annoying solicitors (e.g., recruiters) who are not otherwise spammers. Still, I think it could use a slight improvement. Namely, I think the email address should be removed from the bounce message. Other than that, I think it's a good feature. I'm just glad I don't have to use it very often.

sjk · 25 Oct 2002, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hadaso
I agree that bounce has legitimate uses, but we need to know exactly what it does to use it corerectly. (and of course, it would be more useful if it used the "to:" address to designate the bouncing account, and used the server's logs to trace back the real sender, if it's at all possible).

What if the bounce function constructed a description of what it was going to do and allowed the user to confirm it? Something like:

Code:


The message you are about to send
* will attempt to notify the recipient at <address> that your <address> FastMail address is invalid.  Delivery is not guaranteed.
* contains address information about your FastMail account which could potentially be abused by the recipient.
* may reach an innocent party whos account has been compromised for abusive purposes (e.g. spam).

Do you really want to send this message?

That description+confirmation could be optional (on by default), with a method of disabling it for future sessions (similar to popups that notify/inquire about registration, security, etc. with a checkbox to disable them).

One way to look at it is like how disabled commands enter a "novice mode" dialog in Emacs. For example:

Code:

You have typed C-x C-n, invoking disabled command set-goal-column:
Set the current horizontal position as a goal for C-n and C-p.
Those commands will move to this position in the line moved to
rather than trying to keep the same horizontal position.
With a non-nil argument, clears out the goal column
so that C-n and C-p resume vertical motion.
The goal column is stored in the variable `goal-column'.

You can now type
Space to try the command just this once, but leave it disabled,
Y to try it and enable it (no questions if you use it again),
! to try it and enable all commands in this session, or
N to do nothing (command remains disabled).

I think that type of descriptive interaction is a reasonable way of introducing people to "risky" commands.

Jacob · 29 Oct 2002, 09:20 AM

Like everyone else, I was initially very attracted to FastMail because of the BOUNCE feature. And, like everyone else, was hooked by everything else FastMail had to offer and registered myself and a family member.

ALSO like everyone else, I use a primary email address that forwards all email to my FastMail account. As such, the bounce feature is also fairly useless to me because SPAM comes to my real address.

The concept is wonderful, and I'd like to see the feature improved sooner rather than later to include bouncing from a pickable personality. I'm sure there are throngs of people waiting for this revision.

Thanks for a great service! Please make BOUNCE work soon!

Jacob
----

sjk · 31 Oct 2002, 07:40 AM

Hmm, this thread sure lost steam after my last post...

norbs · 31 Oct 2002, 04:25 PM

OK, so my temporary fix which gives the impression of a "bounce" is to have created an personality at my domain MAILER-DEMON@mydomain.com I have then created a signature with some techie sounding stuff which I took from the fastmail bounce email - (you have to be careful it doesn't extend beyond 68/72 chars a line otherwise it will wrap it for you...) - and then linked this signature with my personality.

I know this probably wouldn't fool a spammer, but it is quite handy for me, because a number of people persist in sending emails to an address @mydomain, which has never existed.... This is a polite, quick and easy way of telling them to stop - having asked nicely many times

All you need to do is hit reply "ignore-orig" and then change the personality.... I think typing a few words in the body of the email : Address "elvis@mydomain.com" does not exist. makes it more convincing...

Andy

View Poll Results: Do you find the “Bounce” button useful?
Yes, it is useful. Please leave it the way it is. (Please explain how it is useful)	22	33.85%
No, it is useless the way it. Either fix it or if it is not possible then remove it	43	66.15%
Voters: 65. You may not vote on this poll

29 Oct 2002, 09:20 AM	#43
Jacob Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 1	Bounce button $.02 Like everyone else, I was initially very attracted to FastMail because of the BOUNCE feature. And, like everyone else, was hooked by everything else FastMail had to offer and registered myself and a family member. ALSO like everyone else, I use a primary email address that forwards all email to my FastMail account. As such, the bounce feature is also fairly useless to me because SPAM comes to my real address. The concept is wonderful, and I'd like to see the feature improved sooner rather than later to include bouncing from a pickable personality. I'm sure there are throngs of people waiting for this revision. Thanks for a great service! Please make BOUNCE work soon! Jacob ----

24 Oct 2002, 07:01 AM	#32
sjk Master of the @ Join Date: May 2002 Location: Eugene Posts: 1,975	Hope this thread isn't becoming redundant to what was recently discussed in how good is FM's filter?...

24 Oct 2002, 09:22 PM	#35
hadaso The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Holon, Israel. Posts: 4,858	Most of what is discussed here results from one imprecise term in the faq item describing the bounce buttton . It says "the addresses the email(s) came from" but the address used is something from the header that is not necessarily the real sender's address. This should be made more clear in the faq. Personally I thought it meant that the SMTP protocol and servers' logs are somehow used to send an error message to the real sender's server, and then to the real sender's account. I think that most people who use "bounce" to bounce spam don't realize that they might be overloading some poor victim's inbox! Most people wouldn't "bounce" spam if they realized this! I agree that bounce has legitimate uses, but we need to know exactly what it does to use it corerectly. (and of course, it would be more useful if it used the "to:" address to designate the bouncing account, and used the server's logs to trace back the real sender, if it's at all possible).

24 Oct 2002, 09:36 PM	#36
Jeremy Howard Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 11,501	Good point--thanks. I'll try and clarify that FAQ entry.

24 Oct 2002, 09:42 PM	#37
hadaso The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Holon, Israel. Posts: 4,858	What about using the server's logs to trace back the real sender? Is that technically possible with SMTP?

24 Oct 2002, 10:06 PM	#38
spiderman Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cork, Ireland Posts: 802 Representative of: Fastcheck.org	Good idea... Would it be possible to add the envelope's FROM field as an X-Envelope-From field?

25 Oct 2002, 01:03 AM	#39
DrStrabismus The "e" in e-mail Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,804	The envelope "from" address is already in the "X-Mail-from" header where the information is available. Although according to RFC 822 the "Return-Path" header is the "definitive information about the address and route back to the message's originator". I don't like to say never, but I doubt there are many spam message where there is a difference between "X-Mail-from" , "Return-Path" and "From".

25 Oct 2002, 01:05 AM	#40
Jeremy Howard Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 11,501	We already add X-Mail-from and use it. However, it's normally forged in spams.

25 Oct 2002, 02:35 AM	#41
Guest Posts: n/a	I like the bounce button. I think it's a good way to blow-off annoying solicitors (e.g., recruiters) who are not otherwise spammers. Still, I think it could use a slight improvement. Namely, I think the email address should be removed from the bounce message. Other than that, I think it's a good feature. I'm just glad I don't have to use it very often.

31 Oct 2002, 07:40 AM	#44
sjk Master of the @ Join Date: May 2002 Location: Eugene Posts: 1,975	Hmm, this thread sure lost steam after my last post...

31 Oct 2002, 04:25 PM	#45
norbs Essential Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: UK Posts: 435	OK, so my temporary fix which gives the impression of a "bounce" is to have created an personality at my domain MAILER-DEMON@mydomain.com I have then created a signature with some techie sounding stuff which I took from the fastmail bounce email - (you have to be careful it doesn't extend beyond 68/72 chars a line otherwise it will wrap it for you...) - and then linked this signature with my personality. I know this probably wouldn't fool a spammer, but it is quite handy for me, because a number of people persist in sending emails to an address @mydomain, which has never existed.... This is a polite, quick and easy way of telling them to stop - having asked nicely many times All you need to do is hit reply "ignore-orig" and then change the personality.... I think typing a few words in the body of the email : Address "elvis@mydomain.com" does not exist. makes it more convincing... Andy