-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of
Fridrik Skulason
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 4:18 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Zafi.b
But SPF is not an anti-virus solution. It is a anti-forgery solution.
I know that. My point is that some people assume that SPF will stop worms
as a "unintentional side-effect". What I am saying is that, yes...if
everyone puplished FPF records and implemented SPF-checking it would most
likely stop current worms - however, the worm authors could easily work
around it.
-frisk
OK. Sorry for sounding pedantic. I think SPF as it is, is a really good
approach to the forgery problem. I get nervous about feature creep. As it
stands, I was able to understand SPF quickly and get it running. When I
read some of the back and forth on the MARID list and what's being proposed
by some, it's worrisom.
People shouldn't oversell what SPF can do. Other people (not thinking of
you here) shouldn't try and morph SPF into the be all end all solution for
all the e-mail problems in the world.
Scott K