Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 11 December 2012 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A55E121F8701 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:38:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.482 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.417, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id amrYszgVcJiq for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:38:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE36021F850B for <asrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:38:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 33040 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2012 17:38:43 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 11 Dec 2012 17:38:43 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=50c76fa3.xn--30v786c.k1212; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=9vhPJlhXZNQxQTYAGVTWEefcnTBywf4xfRFvfw/u4XE=; b=e4kV/Ielb6/BhEFRPYKOz7mjAbmcBfyvj26D0JsGHWzkRig7N8vEzBxe3LAFDU9QdWdnHNPn2DtOCdSvCXeKgkGoLHQKV4tVbx6QH8f9uBIq136SR35NsPJTiY0OWG4j7wlo3iAoe71ILlvVNi3sjCXLfHMYGTkK1v++pF2vqUE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:vbr-info; s=50c76fa3.xn--30v786c.k1212; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=9vhPJlhXZNQxQTYAGVTWEefcnTBywf4xfRFvfw/u4XE=; b=UFrpMERptCbrvC+ajO77dYXV2CUz7+wIbxHPjtdrXRcSUHmGrFwZmefHHqY1Hvc/IKf92D1RDUDu0mTzh7sFJlerqOeLg7O6dmKGiZBkSiEFzbgrEXnAnDO48UDzRRuN9tn8wsxFX1Gn0HgQwvhIq4tB+4UKzRxKXuOW+BzKph4=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: 11 Dec 2012 17:38:21 -0000
Message-ID: <20121211173821.25803.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAFdugakviu=nyqEYh6AA4J_pR1TAYzzOoHcF20r=QL_--WPEDg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:38:46 -0000

>If, for example, gmail/google is supporting DMARC why do they allow
>multi-identities in From: header? this can really break DMARC tests.
>
>Another point about SPF and forwardings... do ones allowing forwarding
>and publishing -all must implement SRS to tackle the problem?

Gee, it seems to be dead horse time.

Forwarding isn't a problem, even though some people who think that
SPF is the FUSSP incorrectly imagine that it is.

SRS is basically saying that I have to change the way my mail system
works in order to work around the bugs in your anti-spam magic bullet.
Sorry, that's not how it works.

SPF certainly has its uses, but after a decade, I hope we all understand
that the world's mail systems are not going to rewrite themselves to
deal with SPF's well known limitations.  Ditto DMARC.