2012/12/9 Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>:
Strange thread. Mostly seems to be based on using SPF in ways that it is
not designed to be used. It's always problematic to criticize a technology
for failing to provide services that it is not intended to provide.
An essential point, above, is worrying about "semi-tech-savvy people".
First, SPF is not for end-users. It is for receive-side operators and their
filtering engines.
When operators believes that SPF and their filtering engines are well
configurated but a forged email pass anyway (by means of this thread),
it finally reaches a "semi-tech-savvy user" who is more trusting of
Twitter mail coming from 'bibble.twitter.com' than if it came from
'random.ru'. None of us are saying that simple users deals with SPF
directly !
Second, embedded technologies, like SPF, cannot be mail fool-proof against
poor use by operators who misunderstand one or another aspect of the
technology. Better software and better documentation are the best one can
do for them.
yes, this is a misunderstanding and I believe this is a good place to
discuss, isn't it?....but I think is a misunderstanding of a huge part
of the operators..excluding you of course !
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg