Dnia 17.06.2022 o godz. 21:35:08 Brandon Long via mailop pisze: > There is a limit to the utility of that thing, however, ie SPF passing doesn't > mean a message isn't spam,
And the reverse is true as well - SPF failing doesn't mean the message is spam. Neither does it mean it is fake - just because of aspects discussed in this thread (forwarding or mailing lists). That was the main goal of SPF - ensuring that the message isn't fake - and it cannot even fulfill that one goal properly. Why even use it at all? Therefore, myself personally don't consider SPF nor DKIM being of any value *at all* with regard to spam protection. I use them outbound, solely because Google requires them; otherwise I wouldn't bother to implement them as I never had any problems with any recipient besides Google due to lack of SPF or DKIM. I completely ignore them on inbound mail. After passing RBLs and some manual allow/deny lists, content analysis is *everything* that matters. Yes, I know content analysis doesn't scale well. And that is the exact problem of Google - your mail system has become too big to be effectively manageable. Everything else are just results of this one problem. A million of small mail operators serving 1000 accounts each will always perform better than one big operator serving one billion accounts. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa [email protected] -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub." _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
