> On 15 Oct 2024, at 22:04, Brad Beyenhof via mailop wrote:
>
> We’ve thought about moving to SPF macros for some time, but one thing that
> gives me pause is that I don’t know if we can trust the validation mechanism
> for every single possible recipient.
>
> Can someone elaborate on chall
Am 03.10.2024 um 15:27:59 Uhr schrieb Marco Moock via mailop:
> Their contact form is broken and their mailing list archive is also
> unreachable (IPv6 no reply, IPv4 file not found).
Just for the others:
They said they closed down their mailing lists because of lack of
legitimate messages.
--
Folks,
Good morning. Take a breath and try this with a cup of coffee or tea...
1. The more features a specification has, the more opportunity for an
implementer to make an error, starting with the potential misreading or
ambiguities in the specification text. Also, the more expensive to do
Dňa 16. októbra 2024 18:13:45 UTC používateľ Brandon Long via mailop
napísal:
>The general theory is that a replay involves mail for a DKIM domain
>coming from different sources/hops than it normally does. Having spf/dkim
>both align
>is usually a good indication that a message is not a replay,
On 10/16/2024 11:22 AM, Michael Orlitzky via mailop wrote:
The killer feature of SPF is that I can tell somebody how to set it up
over the phone. Most small businesses send mail from one or two places,
and usually, I can google the appropriate "include:" for them. Once SPF
is passing, whitelistin
Dnia 16.10.2024 o godz. 15:12:00 Brandon Long via mailop pisze:
> I'd think "able to send mail to receiver foo" vs not is a measurable
> improvement.
Only because that receiver arbitrarily decided that they will not accept
mail that doesn't meet some arbitrary criteria imposed by them.
Of course
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 9:04 AM Dave Crocker via mailop
wrote:
> While SPF is entrenched, and challenges to its use typically gets a
> casual claim that it provides incremental benefit where DKIM fails, I
> believe there is no published data demonstrating that the incremental
> benefit is real an
On Wed, 2024-10-16 at 16:00 +, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote:
>
> 7. The myth that SPF is simple to implement is because it is simple for
> a sender to create a basic SPF record. It does not mean that it is
> simple to create a more elaborate record, or to ensure that all
> authorized send
On 10/16/2024 10:55 AM, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
The most meaningful utility of SPF at the moment I think is to help
identify DKIM replay cases.
I have tried to track the DKIM replay discussions, but do not recall
seeing a reference to SPF's being useful for this. Can you elaborate?
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 2:22 PM Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop
wrote:
> Dnia 16.10.2024 o godz. 15:03:19 Michael Orlitzky via mailop pisze:
> > > 2. The benefit you cite is the usual one for the sender, but a) it
> > > ignores issues with receivers, and b) it ignores multi-hop scenarios.
> >
> > What i
On 10/16/2024 11:13 AM, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
he general theory is that a replay involves mail for a DKIM domain
coming from different sources/hops than it normally does. Having
spf/dkim both align
is usually a good indication that a message is not a replay,
ahh, that makes sense.
Dnia 16.10.2024 o godz. 15:03:19 Michael Orlitzky via mailop pisze:
> > 2. The benefit you cite is the usual one for the sender, but a) it
> > ignores issues with receivers, and b) it ignores multi-hop scenarios.
>
> What issues? A priori, recipients ignore it. It doesn't get much easier
> than t
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:04 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> On 10/16/2024 10:55 AM, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
> > The most meaningful utility of SPF at the moment I think is to help
> > identify DKIM replay cases.
>
> I have tried to track the DKIM replay discussions, but do not recall
> seeing
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:32 AM Slavko via mailop
wrote:
> Dňa 16. októbra 2024 18:13:45 UTC používateľ Brandon Long via mailop <
> mailop@mailop.org> napísal:
>
> >The general theory is that a replay involves mail for a DKIM domain
> >coming from different sources/hops than it normally does. H
On Wed, 2024-10-16 at 18:44 +, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 10/16/2024 11:22 AM, Michael Orlitzky via mailop wrote:
> > The killer feature of SPF is that I can tell somebody how to set it up
> > over the phone. Most small businesses send mail from one or two places,
> > and usually, I can google th
> If SPF were deprecated, was would be the actual, significant effects on email
> anti-abuse processes?
* DKIM+DMARC do not verify the return address. So backscatter spamming would
get more attractive to spammers, unless every receiver implemented some form
of BATV. Which would be yet anoth
16 matches
Mail list logo
