Re: SPF is harmful. Adopt it.

Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> writes:

> Totally different beast.  In SMTP, all a sender has to do is forge a different
> sender address and relay through a different zombie spam relay, and you'll get
> his messages again.  With IM2000, he has to set up a new outgoing mail store
> (for which he pays), quite probably on a different server (because everyone
> knows "message store on spammer.example.net are just spam, ignore
> notifications about them).  It's not cost effective for the spammer.

Why can't the spammer set up a zombie outgoing mail store on a hacked
system, just as spammers today set up zombie e-mail relay stations on
hacked systems?

That is, we already have databases recording which servers send spam,
in the form of the RBL lists.  It helps, but it doesn't solve the
problem.

Ian