Re: User experience

Matthew Elvey wrote:

> SPF on its own, as currently written will have no medium or long term 
> impact on spam other than joe-jobs and bounces and bandwidth.
> The same is true for the non-open Microsoft and Yahoo derivatives.
> That's why I started the "[Asrg] LMAP: RHSBLs better than what we have 
> now?" thread.
> Doug Royer allegedly said:
> >Benefit - saves time by allowing automated tools to track spam sources.
>
> ><I can write tools that always get contact information given a domain 
> name, but can't given an IP. \
> I believe that's false.  Both ARIN et. al. info and domain info is 
> fairly often bogus.
Thank for quoting me accurately. Yes, I  can write such a tool :-)

I never said that sometimes some of the information is a lie.

> Registrars ignore blatantly false info in both, unless there's been a 
> recent change I'm not aware of.
> So I don't believe switching from one to the other is likely to to be 
> a benefit. 
Would you agree that it allows tracking to the spam source of an  
infected machine
where the owner is honest?

--

Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
-------------------------------|-----------------------------
Doug(_at_)Royer(_dot_)com                 | Office: (208)520-4044
http://Royer.com/People/Doug   | Fax:    (866)594-8574
                              | Cell:   (208)520-4044

             We Do Standards - You Need Standards

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature