Cc: in <auto-dbm> replies

>>>>> On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, "j" == johnpc at xs4all.net wrote:

  j> The return address from auto-dbm is already something else, not auto-
  j> dbm itself (it's not nobody, it is in fact a human whose "d" key must
  j> get more sore than the fire button in a cheap shoot-em-up game from
  j> all the bounces). (You might've noticed by actually looking at an
  j> auto-dbm reply! :)

  j> However, if you start copying Cc: lines, you're in trouble. Think
  j> about it a little and you'll figure it out.

Like:	To: johnny at rotten.net
	Cc: auto-dbm at ripe.net

I agree that replying to Cc: is not a good idea, I'd prefer to use
Reply-To:, but note that even then it's still possible to "sewiously
scwew up", although accidental screw ups are less likely.

However, since the From:- address on a auto-DBM reply is always
the same, can't you filter out:-

	"To: auto-dbm" & "From: ripe-dbm" -> bitbucket

Or am I missing something extremely obvious here?  Like, does the
"ripe-dbm" account ever need to send update messages to "auto-dbm"?

Furthermore, the classic way of detecting mail loops is by looking at
the "Received:" headers. Your MTA should be able to handle that all by
itself, no need to program the RIPE DB for it...

Of course, none of the above would protect you from forwarders that
strip/modify headers... :-(

Cheers,
Steven