Re: [courier-users] breaking smtp

Gordon Messmer wrote:
> Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> And at the end of the day, SPF just isn't all that effective anyway.
>> When you can reduce your spam influx by 2-3 orders of magnitude using
>> more sensible and cheaper methods, what is the point of bothering with
>> more questionable methods?
>>
>
> Inferring that you view SPF as an ineffective anti-spam technique, I'll
> agree. SPF is not an effective anti-spam technique. It doesn't try to
> be. It's an email authentication system.
>
> SPF is fairly effective at what it was designed to do.

I'm not sure what you mean by "fairly". It is not effective.
It was designed to be widely adopted and it is not.

By contrast, if greylisting were widely adopted, spammers
would be forced to catch up and much of its effectiveness
would be lost.

SPF has been sentenced 2 years limbo after the MARID/IETF,
so perhaps we'll talk about it again in spring 2008. IMHO,
the day it will be an official protocol, organizations may
be hold responsible for helping phishers by not setting up
adequate SPF policies. That may boost its diffusion and
hence effectiveness.











































-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/.../courier-users