Well.. If you don't like the random junk testing of a domain for SPF
compliance.. then think of it this way.
At the very least, it assures that the domain you are testing is properly
configured for SPF. SPF validation on a domain is
worthless (for that domain) if someone just uses a wildcard to allow all.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Corry" <erik(_at_)arbat(_dot_)com>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Attacking the throwaway-domain problem
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 05:54:12PM +0200, Nicolas Bougues wrote:
- in order for them to send cheaply, spammers have to obfuscate
themselves, and/or make unauthorized use of hijacked
computers. Anything that would make them less anonymous, thus
prosecutable in more countries every day, would severly handicap
them. SPF is about that.
Yes, SPF is about that, but the particular suggestion I was
responding to here didn't make the spammers any less anonymous.
It was merely a small inconvenience for them. History has
shown that such inconveniences are quickly overcome.
--
Erik Corry erik(_at_)arbat(_dot_)com
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-replying such a bad thing?
A: Top-replying.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in email?
-------
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?¡
-------
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?¡