Subject: [Asrg] What is the standard report-to header X-abuse-report-to ?

From: ram <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:08:38 +0530

We provide smtp relay services to our clients and we also spam scan our
going partially. Yet sometimes some weak password account at the clients
end gets compromised and we end up relay quiet a few spams before they
are reported ( on FBL's ) and stopped. 

I plan to add a header to all the outgoing mails from our servers 
X-abuse-report-to: abuse@<mydomain>

Is this the standard header for receiving abuse reports. If there really
exists a "standard" header

---

From: Ian Eiloart <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:13:57 +0000

> exists a "standard" header

There isn't a standard header, and if you're reporting junk mail, why would 
you trust any header in the message? How do you know that the server even 
supports the mechanism?

There would have to be -at the least- a way that the server could tell the 
client "It's ok to trust the Report-abuse-to header". That might be through 
an extension to the POP3/IMAP protocols, or it might be through the 
recipient domain DNS.

And, it should be called report-abuse-to, not abuse-report-to.

-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/

---

From: "Chris Lewis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 11:15:58 -0500

> you trust any header in the message? How do you know that the server even 

Do you know of any servers that support that mechanism?  It's an ad-hoc 
hint aimed for humans, not MTAs.

This is an entirely different kettle of fish than the "implemented in 
software" stuff represented by the "Adding a spam button" thread.  A 
ad-hoc hack, not a expected-to-be header-handled-automatically one.

> And, it should be called report-abuse-to, not abuse-report-to.

There are several different ad-hoc headers currently in use.