-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
This is a message based on information from Thomas Zehetbauer
who is unable to subscribe to this list.
(N.B.: list admin: please try to subscribe him if you can, using
email address <thomasz(_at_)hostmaster(_dot_)org>. The request is confirmed
in RT ticket # 11814)
Done. Thomas should be subscribed now. I can't do anything about Listbox
looking the DUL RBL, though. (If Thomas being listed there still prevents
him from posting to the mailing list, then I can try explicitly approving
him for posting to the list, but if that doesn't help, then that's that.)
(side note: in hindsight it would make sense to have another default
for "all", but we don't. The default result is "+", just like it is
for any other mechanism.)
No, that would be confusing. Instead, we should have better tools that
warn against using "all" or "+all".
Why did Tom report this in the first place? He thinks SPF_PASS is
a reliable indicator of a message not being spam. I tried to convince
him this is not the case, but failed to do so.
Thomas, I read you saying "SPF_PASS has however been a very reliable
indicator that a message is not spam" in your original correspondence with
Alex. By accident, this may be true.
However, it should be pretty obvious that this assumption can NOT generally
hold. If I was a spammer, I would just register a domain and publish
"v=spf1 +all", and thus trick people thinking like you into accepting my
spam.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFe1C4wL7PKlBZWjsRAlM0AJ44GnFR3vJ4V6UjjbqEV0y+24VVmwCg8Cvv
jf9lHwDXSp1t0c0tBIx6tuw=
=t6h9
-----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/?list_id=735