> -----Original Message----- > From: Graham Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:46 AM > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: SPF breaks email forwarding > > > Rolf Kraeuchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hmm, SOFTFAIL scores higher than FAIL?? > > Maybe because some (many?) people reject SPF fail at SMTP > time, so spam with SPF fail is not presented to SpamAssassin. >
And, SPF is not an indication of SPAM vs HAM, but only of forgery? Or a lot of spam comes from large free email hosting companies that use SPF? SA scores based an a huge amount of email and even if it is suppressing that hardfail is scored lower than softfail, I wonder what the score for 'none', ie noneistant spf records would be ;-) If you don't like SPF, don't use it. The SENDING MAIL SERVER has to support it AND THE RECEIVER MAIL SERVER has to support it. If you run your own mail servers, and don't want to use it then DON'T. 99.99999999% of the servers out there could publish valid or invalid SPF records and guess what: If you don't check for it, its not going to affect you! That seems to be something the anti-spf jihad seems to forget. If I publish -all (hardfail) records and you decide to bounce on hardfail, fine. If your ISP publishes and uses SPF records and you don't like it, move.
