Scott,

I just wanted to post and let you know that I started a website
www.adminforums.com and have added a Declude and Imail section, so that
this community can post their configurations without wasting list
bandwidth.  

I for one am interested in seeing what is working for people.  I would
really like to see some of the test configurations that Declude runs
itself...hint ...hint....



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 9:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] SPF vs. Form Mail



>This is kind of a response to all the follow ups this morning.  I can't
>afford to use this test on the majority of my domains because I can't 
>currently make use of WHITELIST AUTH, and I have enough customers that
use 
>third-party outgoing mail servers for one reason or another that this 
>would cause issues there as well.

It seems that a lot of people don't really understand the full power of 
SPF.  Most people assume it is pass/fail, but it is actuall 
pass/fail/unknown.  What this means is that you can set up an SPF record

that instead of saying "E-mail from @example.com that comes from
192.0.2.25 
is definitely legitimate, but everything else is bogus" ("v=spf1 
+ip4:192.0.2.25 -all"), you can say ""E-mail from @example.com that 
+comes
from 192.0.2.25 is definitely legitimate, but any E-mail from
@example.com 
from other IPs may or may not be bogus" ("v=spf1 +ip4:192.0.2.25 ?all").

This is *guaranteed* to give you better results than no SPF record, even
if 
many of your users do not send mail directly through your mailserver.

>I was already debating what to do with a spamdomains variant that was
>coded for local domains, and I was only scoring that at 20% of my fail 
>weight.  I could remove that test and replace it with SPF scored at
20%, 
>however the effects of the SPF would carry over to other sources that 
>would potentially have problems and over which I would have no control
over.

But that's exactly the point -- you have no control over it!  If we set
up 
declude.com as "v=spf1 +mx -all", and I send an E-mail from another IP
and 
it gets caught on your server, that is *my* fault (or the fault of
whoever 
authorized the SPF record for declude.com).

In this case, if one of your users says "But my friend with a competing
ISP 
can get mail from Scott!", you can tell him "But, the company Scott
works 
for does not allow mail to be sent except from their servers."  Often,
you 
get stuck telling a customer "That company has serious problems" (open 
relay, no reverse DNS, etc.).  But with SPF, it is company policy, which

you are honoring.

>There is some potential with this as a negative weight test, however 
>once
>the spammers catch on, the value would be diminished greatly, and of 
>course legit mail servers are sources of spam, just not as often as the

>illegitimate ones, and I don't see the need to credit senders based
only 
>on the fact that they matched their SPF records.  ... Considering these

>issues, I don't see why I should push something forward with such a
flaw.

This might be best discussed on the SPF mailing list, where the creator
of 
SPF and others can better comment on how SPF will deal with this.  Only 
time will tell if spammers will be able to successfully abuse SPF, but
at 
the very least it will give them more work to do, costing them more
money.

>I'm very sorry to have not liked either this effort or the Web-O-Trust
>thing, and I don't want to sound like I'm just being critical for the
sake 
>of it (though sometimes I am overly critical), but I feel that it is 
>constructive for me to say this if for no other reason than to warn
others 
>about the potential of issues, but hopefully rather to influence the 
>process for the better.  I'm sure there are others around here that
feel 
>the same way, but choose not to voice their opinions out of fear of 
>insulting someone else...or maybe I'm just whacked :)

That's fine -- if there are flaws with an idea and nobody comes out and 
says it, everybody loses.

                                                    -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers.
Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask about our free 30-day evaluation.

---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
(http://www.declude.com)]

---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type
"unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.



---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]

---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.

Reply via email to