Am 06.01.2015 um 02:38 schrieb Derek Diget:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 at 00:46 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: =>Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW: =>> On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100 =>> Reindl Harald wrote: =>> > Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen: =>> > > Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52: =>> > > > how can "SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE" fire both? =>> > > =>> > > the above is 2 diff tests =>> > =>> > i know that by myself *but* if the sending domain does not publish =>> > any SPF policy then there should be no positive score for =>> > "SPF_HELO_PASS" =>> =>> It doesn't have a positive score: =>> =>> score SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001 => =>that is a positive score in context of "less spam probability" just because =>somebody sends a HELO command - frankly all day long zombies send HELO =>commands of known domains up to fake PTR'sWhat does (not) having a SPF record and passing or failing have anything to do whether a message is spam or not?
did i say that? i just said what i wrote in the subject is impossible at the same time
SPF has to do with sender policy and is an anti-forgery tool. It is not a anti-spam tool. (A forged message may equal spam to most people, but a spam message does not always equal a forged message.) Similar idea with DKIM. Both allow the domain owner to assert ownership of a particular mail flow, but doesn't say ANYTHING about the domain owner. Again, how much spam mail passes both SPF and DKIM tests? Where SPF/DKIM enter into anti-spam is they tie an domain owner to mail flows such that a reputation system can build built.
i know that all
Not sure about your mail flow, but we get LOTs of spam that passes (one or both) SPF checks.
which has nothing to do with the topic
=>if the envelope domain don't push a SPF policy *only* NO_SPF should hit And back to the original question in post....see <http://www.openspf.org/FAQ/Common_mistakes#helo> To publish/not publish and what to publish in an SPF record discussion should probably be moved to spf-discuss or spf-help at <http://www.openspf.org/Forums>
NO it should not because i talk about which *spamassassin rules* hit and why it is wrong - not mor, not less - the sending domain don't publish any SPF record
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
