spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why not just use S/MIME or GPG signatures?

2003-10-13 14:25:26
Loic Prylli <loic(_dot_)prylli(_at_)abbloi(_dot_)org> writes:
I really like c) because it really makes spf compatible with all the
current dialups-filtering/port25-blocking anti-spam techniques. That
would for instance seriously limit the possibility of thrown-away
domains used in combination with hijacked or misconfigured
dialups/DSL/cable machines. SPF is mainly about avoiding a forged
from, and if it complements current antispam techniques rather than
proposing to replace them, it would make things much easier (IMHO to
block outgoing port 25 by default for a machine is a good thing, even
if of course every ISP should provide the option not do to it for free
...).

In summary, what do you think about proposing the adoption of another
port for MUA->MTA communication?

There already is one.  See the Message Submission RFC (2476).

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2476.html

-- 
Ted Cabeen           http://www.pobox.com/~secabeen            
ted(_at_)impulse(_dot_)net 
Check Website or Keyserver for PGP/GPG Key BA0349D2         
secabeen(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com
"I have taken all knowledge to be my province." -F. Bacon  
secabeen(_at_)cabeen(_dot_)org
"Human kind cannot bear very much reality."-T.S.Eliot        
cabeen(_at_)netcom(_dot_)com

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡