On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:14:54PM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote:
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, vijay gill wrote:
But if instead of foobar.com, it is vix.com or citibank.com, then their SPF records will not point at randomgibberish.comcast.net as an authorized sender. That means that if I do get a mail purporting to be from citi from randomgibberish, I can junk it without hesitation.
Yes, all we need for SPF to work is for spammers to play along and cooperate, and we'll be able to filter out the spam they send.
Earth calling... ;)
I'm probably going into an argument with a net.kook but just to be sure, let me clarify this: How do you think spammers will be able to subvert citibank.com to have random.cablemodem.net as a permitted sender? I've never believed spf was the ultimate solution, just that it allows me to better filter some of the joe-bobs. /vijay - falling yet again into another argument which is probably more annoying than a thorned thong.