Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Justin Mason wrote:
John Hardin writes:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, William Terry wrote:
Is there anything I can do to mitigate this?
Do you publish SPF records?
Logically this should have an effect, but in real-world terms, it
doesn't. So don't worry about it.
On 02.04.08 09:06, John Hardin wrote:
Sure it won't if nobody ever publishes any SPF records.
and they don't publish SPF since "nobody uses them" and they don't use SPF
because "spammers also use SPF" which they understand as "SPF is useless"
some people don't publish SPF because there are not enough incentives to
do so. Other people don't publish SPF because they don't want to! some
even remove the records they published before:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/spf_loses_mindshare/
anyway, I don't think this list is appropriate for debating SPF pros and
cons...
people are someetimes incredibly dumb when it comes to technologies.
Instead, try enabling the vbounce ruleset...
Certainly, do that. But *also* publish SPF records so that the people who
*do* check SPF have a chance to reject forgeries proactively.
Agreed, just do it.
