Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
But back on topic... the OP has been joe-jobbed.
mouss wrote:
he's not the only one... seems there's a lot of backscatter coming in
these days.
Thanks for confirming that spf doesn't fix the problem.
SPF is designed to fix the problem,
ahuh? how would spf fix the problem if spam gets out from an authorized
client (yahoo, google, hotmail, aol, ...). however you respond, you'll
find out that such (ougoing) spam problem isn't fixed _by_ SPF. In
particular, don't tell me "they will fix their outgoing spam".
however as many other standards it works
only if it's implemented.
Steve Prior wrote:
The main problem with SPF is that most other servers out there don't
check it even if you set your own records correctly.
On 10.04.08 09:29, mouss wrote:
The question was whether spammers avoid joe jobbing addresses in domains
that have SPF set (except with a +all). it seems some of them do and
some don't.
however some people can make false assumption that SPF is useless - it is
not. It is always good to have SPF (and DKIM, of course) and the more
servers will implement it, the more effe3ctive it will be.
while I don't say that SPF is useless, you'll have a hard time
convincing me that "it is always good to have SPF...".
I personally have found that SPF causes more problems than it helps, and
for that I do not recommend setting SPF record for "general use" domains.
