Date:  Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:06:22 +0200
From:  "Florian Arzberger" <arzberger (at mark) maxxnet.de>
Subject:  [coba-e:13943] AW:  Re: sendmail question
To:  <coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org>
Message-Id:  <F8AEA842D451411D9CED6CBF3F8F011D@x2>
In-Reply-To:  <200809111940.06521.bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
References:  <VPOP31.5.0l.20080910182828.510.2d7f.1.505a6688 (at mark) t1.tec1.net> <134F219B440745488A75A81FF9B1BBA9 (at mark) TikKlikPC11> <E5C929FC6F6D43418DA3535FF12FD4EF (at mark) OfficeKen> <200809111940.06521.bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
X-Mail-Count: 13943

Michael Stauber <mailto:bq (at mark) solarspeed.net> schrieb am Donnerstag, 11.
September 2008 19:40:

> 
> That is indeed quite useful, as it's strictly locking down what
> Sendmail will do. Especially dissalowing verify is a good procedure.
> Otherwise people can use "verify" to find out what users you have on
> a box and then SPAM them all in one go. Which is not that uncommon.   
> 
> So yeah, I would recommend to put it in and give it a try.

maybe it should be made bq standard then, or are there any potential
downsides?