Re: [exim] Sender callout verification on BATV signed addres…

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Dave Lugo
Date:  
To: exim-users
Subject: Re: [exim] Sender callout verification on BATV signed addresses
On Thu, 14 May 2009, Peter Bowyer wrote:
>
> SPF doesn't stop someone sending forgeries, it enables a 3rd party to
> opt not to receive them, and especially, not to bounce them to the
> forged sender.
>
> A smart spammer might inspect the SPF records of a domain he was about
> to forge and not forge a domain that is SPF-protected, though. Even
> more reason to SPF-protect your domain.
>


Can we skip the discission re how effective SPF is,
it's flaws (perceived or otherwise) and how widely
(or not), it's been adopted?

As the person dealing with the blowback due to the
forgery I mentioned, there was little difference to
me whether it was bounces or sv - all of it was
unwanted.

And that's all I say about the matter, in deference
to the moderators.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo   dlugo@???    LC Unit #260   TINLC
Have you hugged your firewall today?   No spam, thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------
Are you the police?  . . . .  No ma'am, we're sysadmins.