-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Craig Whitmore wrote:
So does this mean spammers are getting smarter and sending out this
batch of spam from domains which only have ?all (returning neutral
only) (note I've never had this spam from domains which have pass or
none as return codes). So they hope antispam systems will see the domain
has SPF rules and make it less spam
Yes, some senders do think that just having _any_ SPF record already
suffices for being treated more gently. And some receivers do think that
_any_ SPF record justifies treating the message more gently already.
Both are wrong, of course.
Or are more and more people putting in SPF information but using ?all
(so the SPF rules mean nothing).
My spam software picks up all the spam even with this in it but it looks
like the spammers are doing it purpose.
Rule #3, spammers are stupid[1].
References:
1. http://bruce.pennypacker.org/spamrules.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFD2f12wL7PKlBZWjsRAr70AJwJFl0irLeXJcAefBcqakEGDnw2ngCgwmyD
TyGP2QSrMTkPYv7m51W2wic=
=hUSL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com