Re: whitelisting links (was Re: misconception in SPF)

On 11/12/2012 14:52, John Johnson wrote:
> Michael Thomas wrote:
>
>> Anybody who thinks that using HTML or outsourcers are "worst
>> practices" is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
>    I highly disagree.  A local bank just hired an outside firm to
>    spam a "newsletter" to their customers in my area. It was quite
>    difficult to tell if it was legitimate, as the bank had published
>    SPF records, yet failed to provide the ip's of the outsourcers
>    servers. And then used the banks domain name as the source.
>
>    This should not be acceptable behavior, especially for a financial
>    institution. It trains their customers to just accept anything
>    and everything, they should be setting the bar, not lowering it.
>
+1

Banks can use outsourcing for their mail, that's fine, but they should 
seriously consider the implications. It's fairly obvious that most banks 
don't.

There are things that an email outsource & bank can do together to keep 
things secure - and OBVIOUSLY secure, but it's clear that neither most 
banks nor email newsletter companies actually understand email enough to 
be using it in this way.



-

Paul Smith Computer Services
Tel: 01484 855800
Vat No: GB 685 6987 53