Re: misconception in SPF

On 12/9/2012 7:43 AM, Christian Grunfeld wrote:
> When operators believes that SPF and their filtering engines are well
> configurated but a forged email pass anyway (by means of this thread),
> it finally reaches a "semi-tech-savvy user" who is more trusting of
> Twitter mail coming from 'bibble.twitter.com' than if it came from
> 'random.ru'. None of us are saying that simple users deals with SPF
> directly !


Anyone who believes that SPF can 'guarantee' that no forged mail will 
get delivered is suffering a very basic failure in their understanding. 
  No changes to SPF can fix this.

The best line of action is to develop better statements about what SPF 
does and does not do, rather than discuss SPF 'failings'.  That is, try 
to help the understanding of operators.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net