Anne P. Mitchell wrote:
>cf. CipherTrust's study released this week in which >50% of the
sources
>for all email surveyed which published SPF records were spammers.
>
>http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/08/31/HNspammerstudy_1.html
Just so there is no confusion... this is good news for SPF, not bad
news.
Absolutely, completely agreed! I should have elaborated. As I have
said in various public posts (elsewhere), if spammers want to tie
themselves to their sites by authentication, that's a *good* thing. My
points are that a) spammers will adopt whatever is out there, and in
this instance b) spammers are stupid - by adopting what they *think* is
an anti-spam protocol to help get their spam through, they are actually
raising their hands and saying "here I am!"
Anne