IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] Is there anything good enough? - Spoofing stats

Vernon Schryver <vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com> Thu, 08 May 2003 20:03 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA07583 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:03:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h48KD5Q13936 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:13:05 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h48KD5813933 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:13:05 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA07497; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:02:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19DrdV-0005fY-00; Thu, 08 May 2003 16:05:01 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19DrdV-0005fV-00; Thu, 08 May 2003 16:05:01 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h48K79812945; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:07:09 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h48K6m812839 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 16:06:48 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA07335 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 15:56:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19DrXQ-0005dG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 May 2003 15:58:44 -0400
Received: from calcite.rhyolite.com ([192.188.61.3]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19DrXP-0005dD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 May 2003 15:58:43 -0400
Received: (from vjs@localhost) by calcite.rhyolite.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id h48JxY3M004053 for asrg@ietf.org env-from <vjs>; Thu, 8 May 2003 13:59:34 -0600 (MDT)
From: Vernon Schryver <vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com>
Message-Id: <200305081959.h48JxY3M004053@calcite.rhyolite.com>
To: asrg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Is there anything good enough? - Spoofing stats
References: <200305081446.53767@grx>
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 13:59:34 -0600

> From: David Walker <antispam@grax.com>

> ...
> > started checking, but it is now the default in popular MTAs.  Have
> > you turned off that check because it is not mandated by an RFC?
>
> I haven't turned it on yet.  So I guess so.
> There is a direct logic path for that rule though.  
> 1.  Someone is sending me a message
> 2.  The domain they are sending from does not exist
> 3.  Therefore they are trying to deceive me and there is no need to bother 
> accepting it.

That logic is based on the dubious assumption that only maliciousness
can cause bogus sender addresses.  Better logic is that mail with bogus
sender addresses cannot be replied to or bounced, and that bogus sender
addresses are often but not always an indication of attempted deceipt.


> The hacks I am objecting to, if I understand them correctly, abuse MX records 

The phrase "abuse MX records" is wrong and inappropriate.  No "abuse"
is involved.

> so that I would only accept mail from a server if it is eligible to receive 
> mail.  Sending and receiving are different functions and should not be 
> required to be done by the same machine(s).

I understood you to be advocating, no demanding that the sending and
receiving ISP be the same since any other mail is "spoofed."  In many
and probably most cases, that restriction is the same as requiring that
sending and receiving MTAs be the same set of machines.

Please note that I strongly disagree with both restrictions.


Vernon Schryver    vjs@rhyolite.com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email