On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Walt Reed wrote:
>
> In addition, SPF records can stop collateral spam from annoying you.
SPF's claims about reducing collateral spam depend on assumptions about
the behaviour of senders which are only valid for a subset of viruses and
spamware. If the last-hop sender is a proper MTA then an SPF rejection
will cause collateral spam like any other rejection. The proportion of
spam that is being sent via MTAs rather than directly is increasing, so
SPF's assumptions are becoming more and more incorrect. In addition to
that, not enough people are checking SPF for it to make an appreciable
difference.
Tony.
--
<fanf@???> <dot@???>
http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
\N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
