spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Better approach to the forwarder problem

2007-01-11 17:30:39
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote:
Apart from that, I'd of course agree that any distinction between
originating and forwarding spam is effectively meaningless.

It's a very important distinction.

When dealing with a spam originator, so long as the decision to block the
mail is done "at DATA" or before, no backscatter is produced.

When dealing with forwarded spam, any refusal to accept the message,
whether "at RCPT", "at DATA", or post-transaction, will cause
backscatter.  Or, perhaps silently lost mail, if the forwarder has
disabled bouncing out of fear for his IP's reputation.

I'm of the opinion that it is better to "eat your spam" than silently
discard mail or emit backscatter.   Thus, forwarded mail should *always go
through*, no matter how spammy it may seem.   (Assuming the forwarding
arrangement was consensual, of course.)

every spammer could just claim to be "forwarding" their spam, and there
would be no way to disprove them.)

You still need whitelisting under my idea.  It's just that it's easier and
more reliable to do that whitelisting than under the status quo.

---- Michael Deutschmann <michael(_at_)talamasca(_dot_)ocis(_dot_)net>

-------
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

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