Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

Christian Grunfeld <christian.grunfeld@gmail.com> Fri, 07 December 2012 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <christian.grunfeld@gmail.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 1EA2321F86AF for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 08:23:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 31tfj3jP8uua for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 08:23:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com (mail-ie0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3268721F8635 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 08:23:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id k10so1556181iea.15 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 08:23:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=CGkZGcyUwYPceLEkDKsEjMlDCP5KWgDJMxAye+fe/Fs=; b=Pl1owqVTlNNfyJsFTA4IjmiOV6YGT4DGMyOYN+cqvMxLitUUEdYK4xSzISjeR04Dn1 4WvWh/8rgnqJRt8O+EyICZ5ZO9gCzE4oIiE6tXeGCDB1FLsKye6P3cezeQZk4SThxwlN L6FbDj2PzuoCga0HUC6k31Gqi/POfnU68MHyPG732OBgJ0rJFprvBnefymHR1qZPvIXK wTDoLpEKAmjQegkf0PjkfPo96obxMW5hL311CAhzBLcd0pZq4PDrqoFm9FSL+dqiVJO6 zbVzc4orAwXAGbFbvSBiIw8ZIAxADkPrhPNOdAftKo9p0KkO6Hn/70pITetVhOIeh/2I HdCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.187.197 with SMTP id fu5mr5351151igc.70.1354897384595; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 08:23:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.65.79 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 08:23:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <50C1A95A.5000001@pscs.co.uk>
References: <20121206212116.10328.qmail@joyce.lan> <50C1A95A.5000001@pscs.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:23:04 -0300
Message-ID: <CAFdugan=tzj+oMMSLH0ukWHK5jF7tSjbp5jx1uBauaq_YF6pxw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Grunfeld <christian.grunfeld@gmail.com>
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
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: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:23:06 -0000

2012/12/7 Paul Smith <paul@pscs.co.uk>:

> This problem is really due to the (IMHO horrible) allowance for an A record
> to be sufficient for mail delivery. However, it would be quite hard to
> remove that allowance nowadays. I don't know the stats for how many email
> addresses use A records for delivery rather than MX, but I'd guess its a
> significant number.

I think you are confused about the MX on the receiver side and the A
record of the sender !
Mails are sent to MX for a domain but the sender has not to have a MX
record to send !

The problem here is that the sender uses a forged address which has an
A record. What you said is that the recipient should not be an A
record and should be an MX. They are two different things !

> As a random thought, would there be the possibility to add some sort of
> marker on a parent domain to say 'we understand MX records, so we don't use
> A records for mail within this domain'? So, if you receive mail from
> 'bibble.twitter.com', you check the TXT records for 'twitter.com' which tell
> you that subdomains/hosts without an MX record won't have mail, and since
> there isn't an MX record for 'bibble.twitter.com', you can reject it/treat
> it as spoofed.

same as above. MX for bibble.twitter.com is only to receive emails.
Nothing prevents someone@bibble.twitter.com to send unless you put a
TXT "v=spf1 -all" for it !