Slashdot Log In
What Happens To Bounced @Donotreply.com E-Mails
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Friday March 21, @04:30PM
from the lazy-people-who-can't-configure-mail-servers-to-do-their-bidding dept.
from the lazy-people-who-can't-configure-mail-servers-to-do-their-bidding dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Washington Post's Security Fix blog today features a funny but scary interview with a guy in Seattle who owns the domain name donotreply.com. Apparently, everyone from major US banks to the Transportation Security Administration to contractors in Iraq use some variation on the address in the "From:" field of all e-mails sent out, with the result that bounced e-mails go to the owner of donotreply.com.'With the exception of extreme cases like those mentioned above, Faliszek says he long ago stopped trying to alert companies about the e-mails he was receiving. It's just not worth it: Faliszek said he is constantly threatened with lawsuits from companies who for one reason or another have a difficult time grasping why he is in possession of their internal documents and e-mails.'"
Related Stories
Firehose:What Happens To Bounced @Dontoreply.com E-mails by Anonymous Coward
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading ... Please wait.

*Cough* (Score:5, Insightful)
WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)
- Dylan O'Notreply
Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Informative)
Surely they should use example.com (Documented in RFCs to never be a real domain). It has no MX and points to a simple web page that just says it's an example for documentation and gives a link to the relevant RFC.
Re:WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Now that I have thought about it a bit more, this is about the money. If they put donotreply@companydomain.com, then the inevitable replies would eat up their bandwidth and processing power on their incoming mail servers.
By forging that information, which is not good policy, they are intentionally redirecting that reply to somewhere else. They may have thought that the sending mail server would simply give a permanent delivery failure notice to the sender, but in this case that forged information leads to an active mail server which accepts all of those emails.
Who is the bigger "butthead" here? The companies intentionally forging their emails or the guy who owns this domain and is exploiting this companies (after they have already harassed him) to save a couple of animals?
Re:WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone bright enough to -think- having the messages bounce to another domain would save them money should be able to think that maybe just maybe if they have the messages bounce to another domain that this other domain might actually exist, accept that bounced mail, and even read it.
If they really wanted to save money, and not take that risk they could blacklist an address at their mail gates front door. That would eliminate most, but not all the cost of handling the return mail.
And it would be a simple matter to simply have it go to "donotreplay@donotreplay.company.com" which wouldn't have an MX record configured, and would thus never get anywhere. And being a subdomain of your own, it wouldn't be incidently delivered to someone else either.
Re:WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Informative)
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606 [ietf.org]
Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)
I've also wondered if routing your mail using user%example.org@example.com notation still worked. Could one give out an address like user%example.com@spamfilter.example to run it through a spam filtering service and reject any mail that didn't come via spamfilter.example (if spamfilter.example allowed such relaying syntax)?
Sorry, first disclosure, I can't even patent it now.
Business plan (Score:5, Informative)
Stupid on both sides (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like he is the one being hurt here. Of course somebody has to own that domain (I guess) and he decided too. Terrible domain name, but still not his fault.
Which brings me to:
All of these organizations and companies are just being cute by forging their FROM headers. Technically that should not be allowed, but you can do it anyways. They don't want to deal with it and they create "one-way" traffic by inserting bogus information into that header.
The problem is that bogus information is an actual domain that is active and running a mail server. They are treating it like is a reserved word.
The lawsuits are funny, since the header information will show conclusively that those people intentionally redirected the traffic to this guy. If anything, he can counter-sue.
The only thing I can think of is that donotreply.com becomes a reserved word, which is probably easier than getting all those mail administrators to change their behavior, or to get smarter.
In any case, the domain owner is without fault on this one. Unless you count being stupid as a fault, which picking that domain is a little unwise.
I have a suggestion: (Score:5, Funny)
2. Donotreply owner sets up an autoreply for companya@donotreply.com. This auto-reply should be inappropriate, goatse is definitely an option.
3. Company A loses customers in droves, problem solved.
RFC 2606 (Score:5, Informative)
".invalid" is intended for use in online construction of domain
names that are sure to be invalid and which it is obvious at a
glance are invalid.
I did this once. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I did this once. (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of my younger days (Score:5, Funny)
I learned my lesson, though. Now I never put my real phone number in the whois record for my domains.
Heh - Been there, done that (Score:5, Funny)
My favorites:
Sent: Sunday, July 04, 1999 8:12 AM
To: kai@hershey.com
Subject: From: Kim!!
Hi! grandma I am so thankful that you came all the
way from Florida to see me and by the way..... thanx
for the choc cookie!! and next time you come over
could you bring the extra pleasure condoms. I need
them for me and Ryan.
love you Grandma!!
Kim
Sent: Monday, July 05, 1999 12:09 PM
To: Kim
From: Kai
Subject: From: Kim!!
Kim:
We are not your grandmother.
Kai Ponte
Hershey Business Systems
Then there was this one from an AOL member (figures):
From: TrtleGrl69@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 2:19 PM
Subject: no response to our email dealing with
dead bugs in my payday
I am extremely disappointed at the fact you have not
responded to this incident. I'm upset that I purchased a
payday and began eating it and ended up seeing a worm like
bug with bug carcasses and holes in and on the candy
bar.
I
Talk about extremely bad customer service.
Chad Weaver
I liked my response:
From: Ponte, Kai <kai@hershey.com>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 7:20 AM
To: TrtleGrl69@aol.com
Subject: RE: no response to our email
dealing with dead bugs in my payday
The worm like creature you found - was it alive?
Did it taste good?
Kai Ponte
Information Technology Specialist
Hershey Business Systems
They should be using... (Score:5, Informative)
In a similar manner, people wanting fake IP addresses to use for documentation, training, etc., should use addresses in the 192.0.2.0/24 range, which is reserved by RFC 3330 [rfc-editor.org].
He's not just some guy in Seattle... (Score:5, Informative)
Incidentally, they never did send me a prize for winning that CrateMaster contest. Bastards!
Re:you can own the headline domain (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Never thought of "donotreply.com" (Score:5, Funny)
I always just use me@yourmomshouse.com.
Re:forgery? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/canspam.shtm [ftc.gov]
"It bans false or misleading header information. Your email's "From," "To," and routing information - including the originating domain name and email address - must be accurate and identify the person who initiated the email."