Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-07-02 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Ian Jackson wrote: I'm strongly opposed to SPF, mainly because the technical details are insane. See for example what I said in RISKS: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.18.html#subj10 Amusingly I encountered a SPF filter for the first time this week: a mailserver rejected an email

Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-07-02 Thread Raul Miller
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 12:20:44PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Amusingly I encountered a SPF filter for the first time this week: a mailserver rejected an email from declaring it was spoofed. Only it didn't see that the mailserver that contact it was only relaying the message and was not

Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-06-30 Thread Ian Jackson
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 03:36:08PM -0500, david nicol wrote: We could demand SPF listing or c/r, until junk all has SPF. I'm strongly opposed to SPF, mainly because the technical details are insane. See for example what I said in RISKS: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.18.html#subj10 Ian.

Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-06-30 Thread Raul Miller
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:57:59PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.18.html#subj10 I have reason to believe that Steven Bellovin's criticisms are being taken seriously -- it's possible that future SPF drafts will have addressed all of his concerns. That said, I think

Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-06-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Raul Miller wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 03:36:08PM -0500, david nicol wrote: We could demand SPF listing or c/r, until junk all has SPF. SPF certainly introduces a level of accountability. It likely increases the cost for all spammers and increases the risk for illegal

Re: [ssta@clothcat.org: Re: c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]]

2004-06-24 Thread Raul Miller
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 09:49:05AM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: I've seen figures as high as 85% of email to Debian lists being spam talked about. No more than 1% of that hits my inbox. That's impressive. Spam mails fake headers anyway, a c-r system would not stop the spam, it would just make

c/r for nonsubscribers Re: Posting on the list [pasc@murphy.debian.org: Re: md5sum FILE produces spurious ` -' in output]

2004-06-01 Thread David Nicol
I have a small challenge-response system that is queried rather than being integrated into the system that uses it. This challenge response system (the RAPNAP database) could be integrated into SPF queries without too too too much alteration of a DNS tool such as rbldns. Were the debian project