Re: [Exim] Re: Fixing SPF Forward Problem by Reply-to: Hack?

On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 01:56 +0100, Sven Geggus wrote:
> SPF may have its drawbacks, but the SPAM Problem without SPF is certainly
> worse than the forwarding problem we get when adopting SPF.

On Sat, 2004-03-20 at 21:19 -0800, Avleen Vig wrote:
And the spam problem is a hundred, if not a thousand times worse.

And the spam problem _stays_ that way even in SPF's Brave New World. SPF
does _not_ claim to be a total solution to the spam problem; it offers
you a way to validate SMTP reverse-paths from domains publishing SPF
records, and that's _all_.

For it to be sane to deploy SPF, you'd have to be able to say "the
contribution which SPF makes to decreasing the spam problem is larger
than the forwarding problem it causes."

And of course when considering how much SPF decreases the spam problem,
you have to count its benefit when taken in _addition_ to other measures
which can already validate SMTP reverse-paths without breaking
forwarding. Which is basically zero, because there are ways of
preventing the use of fake reverse-paths _without_ breaking SMTP
installations (and concepts) worldwide.

--
dwmw2