spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Great stuff

2004-01-06 23:27:24
In <btfb06$it5$1(_at_)sea(_dot_)gmane(_dot_)org> Jim Ramsay 
<i(_dot_)am(_at_)jimramsay(_dot_)com> writes:

R. Scott Perry wrote:

[1] You end up being a spammer (the majority of spam sent to you
will result in confirmation requests being sent to innocent victims)

On the off chance that a spammer puts in a "real" address in the
envelope sender (I think they usually just generate random strings),
this is true.  However, I feel that this is seldom and using SPF
should reduce this.

It is *because* spammers forge real email addresses of innocent third
parties that so many people are interested in SPF.


Also, if you say that a bounce is spam, I suppose all MTAs are guilty
of this, really, and only SPF can save us :)

MTAs should try *real* hard to reject email during the SMTP session
instead of accepting the email and then generating a bounce.  A rejection
can't always be done, but bounces sent to innocent third parties is a
problem.



I'll skip responding to the rest of your note, except to say that I
think Scott Perry understands the situation very well.


-wayne

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>