[SpamCop-List] Re: OT SPF is harmful. Adopt it

[Chip Paswater]

> > It is pretty strongly negative, but shows a good
> > understanding.
> 
> More than 100,000 domains disagree with JdeBP to a certain
> degree, and publish sender policies.  What he says about
> (ab)using TXT records in DNS makes sense, but it's not the
> complete picture.
> 
> As long as "my" spammer doesn't tell me why he stopped to
> forge "my" domain resulting in 1,000 bounces per day for
> about six months, I still think that SPF did the trick.
> 
> In theory the TXT issue is addressed (by using a new DNS
> record type) in current drafts, that part of his objections
> actually has something to do with DNS and old / broken DNS
> implementations today.

I've been using SPF on my domains for about a year now, and haven't seen 
any decrease in the amount of forgories using my domains as originators.
Hopefully the spammers will get the message sooner or later.

I've just started using SPF on inbound mail (via Spamassassin 3.0) and I 
really like it.  I read the article above, and I agree the guy has some
points, but most of it is just FUD and reads like other DJB rants.  The
fact is, email isn't open and free like it used to be, and people are
going to have to change in order to fix the spam problem.

It's not unlike buffer problems in software.  There was a time where it was
perfectly acceptable for lazy programmers to have buffer overflows, because
who would possibly exploit them?  That's not the case anymore.