From owner-nanog@merit.edu Sat Dec 10 16:56:38 2005 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:55:38 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: SMTP store and forward requires DSN for integrity

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, Douglas Otis wrote:

...

BATV will make forged DSNs a thing of the past, irrespective of where a recipient list is checked, an AV or SPAM filter is added, etc.

Stop plugging a recipient-side cost-shift scheme that you're directly involved with as some sort of panacea. BATV has benefits, as do other schemes, but you're still fixated on it as being the end-all, be-all of forgery prevention -- by making third parties do the dirty work and letting the instigators off the hook.

By putting the costs on the shoulders of third parties, you're putting yourself squarely on the side of the spewing hosts, and being as ignorant as the admins running the anti-malware products on those hosts. For shame.

I recommend to all a review of the "Rules of Spam". Rule #1, in particular. Specifically the "Lexical Contradiciton" and "Sharp's Corollary". We seem to have yet another example for the 'rules-keeper's refrain'. *sigh* Considering the source of _this_ demonstration, one can only despair -- what possible chance is there for things to 'get better', when one of the putatively 'good guys' espouses that kind of double-think?