Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 May 2004 07:30:30 -0400
From:      "Cirelle Enterprises" <gcirino@cirelle.com>
To:        <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>, <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: How do fix a good solution against spam..
Message-ID:  <024501c439a6$e348f420$fbb4a741@cedata.net>
References:  <1886.213.112.193.11.1084410012.squirrel@mail.hackunite.net><3063.151.31.34.32.1084484911.squirrel@mail.redix.it> <20040514103447.GA5131@grummit.biaix.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Joan Picanyol" <lists-freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
To: <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>; <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 6:34 AM
Subject: Re: How do fix a good solution against spam..


| * roberto@redix.it <roberto@redix.it> [20040513 23:48]:
| >  2) use Sender Policy Framework (see http://spf.pobox.com);
|=20
| =
http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/smtp-spf-is-harmful.html=

|=20
| qvb
| --
| pica

Actually, SPF is not a spam tool. It was designed
to protect against the Joe Job and only if everyone adopts it.

Anything beyond this is a stretch.

The rest of the complaints in the spf is harmful link are moot
as a growing trend is to do away with certain portions of RFC's=20
such as bounces.

We have put it in place to monitor the results, and contrary to the=20
article, AOL has not adopted the policy, all they have done is place
a DNS text entry indicating anybody using an AOL address is ok with
them.

We do tag email that has an out and out SPF failure so our content
filters can have their way with it.

Regards
Greg



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?024501c439a6$e348f420$fbb4a741>