-----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 David
Woodhouse
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 12:25 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [spf-discuss] Sendmail white paper
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 12:00 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Also, since publishing my -all record, the number of bounces I
receive due
to forged spam has dropped about 95%. I consider that a side benifit
(spamassassin was already dealing with them pretty nicely).
Only 95%? That's quite poor in comparison, and it's much higher than any
other estimates I've seen; so much so that I believe it's a guess, and
an inaccurate one at that. Or it's caused by other factors, like the
fact that recipients are slowly starting to get a clue and _reject_ mail
instead of accepting and bouncing it.
Yes, it is a guess. It's actually a conservative one. I don't keep
detailed stats, so when I guess I stay conservative because I don't want to
promise.
In the last 24 hours, we got none.
Now, this isn't because everyone is checking my SPF record and rejecting
rather than bouncing. It's because enough MTAs will reject on SPF fail,
that the spammers are moving one. To me, SPF is not about stopping spam,
it's about stopping spam that purports to come from my domain(s).
Scott Kitterman