As publishers of software and standards which perform criminal+illegal
activities, and immoral purpose (erasing emails without sender or
recipient consent), what do you believe your own legal risk to be?
I have been in the PKI business for ten years now. I am not a lawyer but
I was originally hired by the VeriSign practices (law) group. I have
spoken at a number of ABA sponsored conferences and seminars on the
legal issues of PKI, in particular the issue of risk.
The risk of adding SPF descriptions to your domain is trivial, all you
are doing is to describe the configuration of your email service.
There is settled case law in the US that establishes that an ISP may
delete incomming email identified as spam.
The risks of running a reputation service such as I described are
absolutely non-trivial. They are the reason why third party trust
services are not cheap. I won't go into how risk is managed, that is
largely a proprietary issue. But it is certainly one that is well
understood by leading trust providers.
Phill
-------
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?¡