RE: SPF too late?

Chris Drake [christopher(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com] wrote:
> BrightMail claims false-positive rates of 1 in a billion. I've been
> using it for 3 days, and it's been spot-on so far (I get a *lot* of
> junk and a lot of legitimate mail).  There's no need for SPF or
> SenderID or anything else if it can keep this up.
Neither SPF nor Sender-ID are anti-spam technologies.