John Levine wrote: >> F2F was created in a kinder, gentler time, when address spoofing >> wasn't nearly as much of a problem as it is now. The fact that F2F >> hasn't evolved to avoid spoofing users' addresses is a problem that >> is only made more tangible by email authentication. >> > > I have to agree with Mike (alert the media!) that this seems to be a > solution looking for a problem. There are F2F systems all over the > net, and the amount of spam or hostile spoofage we get from them is > trivial. >
To clarify my content, I'm not referring to spam or hostile spoofing from the F2F systems. I'm referring to the spoofing done by F2F in an environment where there is a lot of spam/hostile spoofing elsewhere in the environment, and that F2F could be doing more to differentiate themselves from the bad stuff (use their own From address, for example). -Jim _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
