spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: some statistics

2004-04-14 15:51:23

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nigel Metheringham" 
<Nigel(_dot_)Metheringham(_at_)dev(_dot_)InTechnology(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] some statistics


On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 17:19, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
*Mailing lists* is a much bigger problem for me, since lots of academic
mailing lists are extremely unlikely to switch to SRS in the academic
lifespan of any of the grad students maintaining the lists. It's why I
have
to use "?all" rather than "-all", and why I'm examining the SpamAssassin
code in 3.0 to provide SPF based scoring.

Any mailing list (excluding straight alias exploders - which are just
forwarders, not mailing lists, and only suitable for small scale
internal use where they are protected from external injection) that
doesn't replace the envelope sender is so badly broken that its beneath
consideration.

I'm not sure I can explain why this attitude is so deadly. These are major
scientific research groups, such as SIGGRAPH. As a matter of doing my job, I
cannot bounce mail from their mailing lists and say "too bad they won't do
it right: blocking potential spam is worth you're not being to see any
messages from any mailing list members in our domain".

If we cop this attitude on potential users, then they will proceed to ignore
us as elitist geeks. This would make SPF far more difficult to implement
broadly, and make it a fairly useless protocol because the subscription rate
would remain quite low.


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