Re: Question about 'standards' WRT BATV and SAV

10 msg	header check question
12 msg	verify parameters
4 msg	Configure postfix in big env
2 msg	envelope sender '<>' via uucp gets rewrit...
2 msg	Spam filtering only for specific email accounts
3 msg	Postfix 2.4 to 2.5: smtp(d)_tls_session_cache_d...

Question about 'standards' WRT BATV and SAV
\ Robert Fournerat (8 May 2008)
. \ mouss (8 May 2008)
. \ (Wietse Venema) (8 May 2008)
. . \ Mike Selner (12 May 2008)
. . . \ Victor Duchovni (12 May 2008)
. . . \ Arne Hoffmann (12 May 2008)
. . . . \ Mike Selner (12 May 2008)
. . . . . \ mouss (12 May 2008)
. . . . . \ Arne Hoffmann (12 May 2008)
. . . \ mouss (12 May 2008)
. \ Ralf Hildebrandt (9 May 2008)
. . \ Jacqui Caren (9 May 2008)
. \ Arne Hoffmann (9 May 2008)
. . \ Bill Cole (9 May 2008)
. \ Bill Cole (9 May 2008)

7 msg	my solution to fight backscatter email
2 msg	AUTO: Joe Grastara is out of the office (return...
12 msg	Q about sender_dependent_relayhost_maps inbound...
16 msg	Milter Suggestions
9 msg	Transport table and postmap
3 msg	Archiving e-mail?
8 msg	Error 550: unable to relay
1 msg	FW: new subject
13 msg	TLS handshake error
6 msg	Seperating SMTP and POP/IMAP services
3 msg	Test 2
1 msg	Testing
12 msg	[Fwd: ldap users & aliases config]

Subject:	Re: Question about 'standards' WRT BATV and SAV
Group:	Postfix-users
From:	mouss
Date:	12 May 2008

Mike Selner wrote:
> I have address_verify_sender = <> and I use SAV (no flames please, I
> have already read the thread and I think I understand the implications).
>
> We see a significant number of envelope senders in the forms:
>
> from=<prvs=SOMEUSERNAME=010fbe85f> and
>
> from=<SOMEUSERNAME/XYZ>
>
> (and similar) where SOMEUSERNAME is the sender's address.
> SAV probes with <> fail in both of these cases.
>
> Mail from <> to SOMEUSERNAME is also rejected, though
> from what I am reading here, this is due to their broken BATV
> implementation.

don't speculate.

Another possibility is that the remote site implements checks to block
backscatter.
Another one is that they do not accept mail from the null sender.

>
> We are getting a number of people who are not receiving mail because
> the SAV never completes due to the sender's broken BATV.
>
> Is someone willing to write a patch to SAV to parse the envelope
> sender and then verify the "stripped" sender address
> SOMEUSERNAME?

you just said that this one is also rejected!

>
> Or provide a better suggestion on how to SAV these scenarios, until
> the senders / appliance vendors fix their broken BATV?

the only fix is to stop using SAV.

>
> Whitelisting the sender domain (or omitting from SAV probes) is
> getting tiresome.