On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Seth Goodman wrote:
Michael Deutschmann wrote on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:45 PM -0500:
While it's true that ultimate responsibility rests with the system that
generates a delayed bounce to a forged address, it's also true that
there is no method today, short of tricks such as SES, to determine the
validity of return-paths on forwarded mail.
So to be safe, the recipient system must *always* place forwarded mail in
the end-users mailbox, no matter how confident the automated systems are
that it is spam, since there's no other direction it may safely go.
Thus it is completely rational to blame the forwarder who handed you
the forgery. Every system is responsible for what they emit.
The forwarder robotically follows the end-user's orders, so the end-user
is responsible for the results of those orders. So if the forwarder
accepts spam, it is the end-user's responsibility to "eat it".
---- 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