Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication

In <[email protected]> "K.J. Petrie" <[email protected]> writes:

> I hate to spoil a good party,

Hi.

I'm afraid there isn't much of a party here, good or otherwise.  Yours
is the first post to this list since May, and there hasn't been any serious
discussion on this list since the MARID working group was shut down.

> SPF, for instance, breaks forwarding. [snip]
>
> [...] What is published for the use of the good guys is also available 
> to the baddies, [...]  Once the spammers have 
> such a database it will be relatively simple for them to write software which 
> spoofs credible domains for every spam injection point they use.


Both of these points that you raised are very old arguments that have
been discussed to death many times over the last 3-4 years.  See the
archives of the ASRG, spf-discuss, and this MARID mailing lists.

None of the things you said haven't been discussed before.  Some of
the points have been well rebutted by various people, others see these
as points where reasonable people can disagree on.  I think it is
unlikely that you will change many minds, and, since this mailing list
is pretty dead, it is probably not a very good place to try discussing
it any more.


> I was directed to this list by the spf-discuss sign-up response.

Thanks for pointing that out.  It looks like the spf-discuss "welcome"
message has not really been updated since this working group was
closed down.  I have edited it to bring things up to date.

In particular, it no longer says that if you think SPF is
fundamentally flawed, you should take your discussions here.  That was
reasonable advice back when the MARID WG was trying to create
something better, but I don't think it is a reasonable request any
longer.


-wayne