Postfix.org SPF
in [Postfix]
|
From: mouss on 6 Jul 2010 18:43 JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net a �crit : > Yahoo has ulterior motives? They wish to push their domain keys. > Others probably likewise have ulterior motives. > Do you also oppose SPF, and if so what is your motives? I will repeat myself: this is not the place to discuss SPF. SPF has been debated to death here and elsewhere, and those discussions brought nothing useful. It is your right to believe in the SPF God, but please don't preach for your religion here. if you want to know what I think about SPF, I'll invite you to search the archives of this list and the spamassassin list. With all due respect, I won't do that for you. if you're curious, I am not for nor against SPF. I take it as easily as: if everybody uses SPF, I have no choice but use SPF. until then, I don't care.
From: Ram on 8 Jul 2010 01:45
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 23:39 -0700, JunkYardMail1(a)Verizon.net wrote: > Very aware spammers can create their own domains and and SPF records. They > can do essentially the same thing with any anti spam measures. And I have > see a number of them do just that, an SPF record of entire IPv4 address > space (0.0.0.0/0). But guess what, everyone of them has been in an RHSBL. > The fact it prevents them from using just any ol domain instead of their own > makes it extermely quick and easy for them to get detected and added into > the RHSBL's. > > Requiring an SPF record to publish a domains authorized MTA's is very > effective. > Having a cover-all SPF record doesnot mean the domain is spamming. Even a top email standards aware company like messagelabs has a stupid SPF record dig messagelabs.com TXT +short "v=spf1 +all" Nevertheless SPF is an excellent tool for whitelisting with SA whitelist_auth feature. If postfix.org also users SPF I could use it for all my servers here. |