spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: URGENT: Community Position on SenderID

2005-02-23 19:28:12
Hannah Schroeter wrote:

You use SES or Mark's SRS-like trick, with less impact on
other functioning of mail.

Get them to publish some proper I-Ds, and the deployment to
scare spammers away from my vanity domain like SPF did, then
I'd consider to ask my ISP to test new tricks.  I can't pull
this more than once per year. ;-)

 [SES] 
Unless they use a non-empty envelope sender, but then the
operators and developers of those systems should be shot.

Yes, I even have a script for this purpose, it sends the text
"Erroneous spam bounce / challenge / forward - please use a
 filter and/or SPF" to my clipboard, I paste it in the subject
of the abuse report and edit it.  It had almost no effect, one
postmaster sent me the same link to the JdBP SPF-rant twice.

SPF did the trick, because "my" spammer believed in the idea.
 
SPF pass w/o whitelist can be spam too

Sure, SPF without -all is for cowards or losers. and SPF checks
without rejecting FAIL is rather pointless.  If they want to
waste time they should test "hashcash" - okay, that's on the
side of the sender.

SPF pass w/ whitelist can be less spammy, of course

It should be near zero spam, or else you'd fix your whitelist.

                       Bye, Frank



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