I've just checked some of our spamtraps from 05/01/2001 through today. During that time, we received just 1 spam (going to 4 of our spamtraps) using the NULL sender. That's well under 1% of all the spam that we get.

Is it worth breaking the RFCs, losing E-mail, and getting postmasters mad enough to block you mail, in order to reduce less than 1% of spam?

>The owners of the company I work for are extremely offended by graphic >"Enlarge your >penis" e-mails and such.

For that, you may want to use IMail's built-in filters. Or, if you want to get really tough on spam, you could use our software (the one spam that was sent from <> failed 2 of the Declude tests).

>And, since it seems, mostly the pornographic >spammers are the main ones that use the null sender mail blasters, it's >worth it to avoid the aggravation.

Remember, too, that you are letting these criminals take away your ability to know that mail you send is not delivered.

I do find the porno spam to be the worst, as there are about 1 *billion* porno spams a year sent to children. So I can certainly sympathize.

-Scott

Declude: Anti-spam and Anti-virus solutions for IMail. http://www.declude.com