-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Paul Howarth wrote:
| Jonathan Gardner wrote:
|
|> On Thursday 22 July 2004 04:03 pm, Jef Poskanzer wrote:
|>
|>> Jonathan Gardner <jonagard(_at_)amazon(_dot_)com>:
|>>
|>>> SPF does indeed solve the spam problem. SPF will bring spammers to
|>>> justice.
|>>
|>>
|>> Wrong and wrong.
|>
|>
|> Please refute my arguments. Just telling me I'm wrong won't show me
|> where I went wrong. I laid out my chain of arguments most clearly, and
|> I want to see where I'm wrong, or at least where we disagree.
|
|
| I've been away for a couple of days and haven't yet caught up on my old
| emails so apologies if I'm re-hashing something that's been done to
| death recently, but:
|
| how does SPF stop a spammer using throwaway domains with SPF records
| allowing any zombie to send for the domain, where the domain was
| registered using false information and phished credit card details?
|
It doesn't directly, but the reputation systems it allows
would make it trivial to spot such an attempt.
"hey, this domain is only a week old and has +all? better check
it more closely..."
- --
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBAURl8/QSptFdBtURAsuTAJ9epwKKVzvOu138vmGhc8MGEXnPygCfWrbV
h56h5plrcz6SaBsm71voalA=
=iAbi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----