--On 14 May 2009 10:00:56 -0400 Dave Lugo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2009, David Saez Padros wrote: >> >> If you read the arguments against callout it says that callouts are >> a broken technique but that's not true (at most a deficient >> implementation of sender callout could be broken) and the problem >> he has is not about sender callouts is about people forging his >> domain, which he can prevent by publishing spf records. Same for > > As a datapoint: > > I've seen spammers disregard SPF, and send a few hundred K > items/day that are forged. Of course publishing SPF records won't stop spammers. But, if you publish an SPF record with -all then the rest of the world can detect the spam. It should, thereafter, not send you backscatter. If you won't help me to determine whether email "From" your domain really is from you, then why should I care? On the other hand, if you do give me a hand there, then I can avoid generating backscatter into your domain. Everyone wins, except the spammers. If, on the other hand, everyone starts panicking about backscatter, blocks callouts, rejects all bounce messages and autoreplies, then everyone loses except the spammers. > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------- > Dave Lugo [email protected] LC Unit #260 TINLC > Have you hugged your firewall today? No spam, thanks. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Are you the police? . . . . No ma'am, we're sysadmins. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex 01273-873148 x3148 For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/ -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
