Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

Christian Grunfeld <christian.grunfeld@gmail.com> Mon, 10 December 2012 15:59 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 8861E21F8529 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.349
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, 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 lYXYYaMYZx6F for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ia0-f180.google.com (mail-ia0-f180.google.com [209.85.210.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59BD21F8528 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ia0-f180.google.com with SMTP id t4so4231998iag.11 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:51 -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=os3kpKHPz5NBZWyfT1ManRTyD5i4LBP0iujf/tON96I=; b=XuwBvQypP1zjlrtZxN063lAgu9kQOEvVQw6Om2AWZamO2Z1p6vjdpdEYF8FdtVWd2k bEMprroVLIIbbsZECUuyJiRX0lgPgSFcLleorn+mQ+PbVB9d0kjwBCN8RjLsujFBwFTL Jk/8q9ETZmfi7gFDR1Ig4tpdmjraepRkdke5Us6SFWNT5oDVyyDLqQY9xCrHMnbg5/mp yBnS+VURv5HUvhVjzIHP5/7qQMsJThREOoz+igUWirHfEFZRI/DKSOwUqrXV7/jUulux 4gJtrxNj0WdZZY61/V4f7Raz3QRkZAhEli23Qh3BbSk2SiTvFvWeRlAYOC173FnyX7yU g1fw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.13.133 with SMTP id h5mr7049925igc.2.1355155190776; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.65.79 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:59:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20121210145627.GA21217@gsp.org>
References: <20121206212116.10328.qmail@joyce.lan> <50C1A95A.5000001@pscs.co.uk> <50C4A7F8.3010201@dcrocker.net> <CAFdugamTbTirVV2zXKOmc9oTaCS+QiTemhT=jvYJnHYscHQK7g@mail.gmail.com> <0D79787962F6AE4B84B2CC41FC957D0B20ACE6D0@ABN-EXCH1A.green.sophos> <20121209213307.D90C12429B@panix5.panix.com> <CAFduganBR_E-ui-3Xbic6F7qSmg1-Q+ideXLvb+1isLz8OF0Nw@mail.gmail.com> <0D79787962F6AE4B84B2CC41FC957D0B20ACFFE1@ABN-EXCH1A.green.sophos> <50C5A9A0.105@pscs.co.uk> <0D79787962F6AE4B84B2CC41FC957D0B20AD01B2@ABN-EXCH1A.green.sophos> <20121210145627.GA21217@gsp.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 12:59:50 -0300
Message-ID: <CAFdugakdqoN7S2YuWEVHo_YaOZJTPKt1w7tdcn8oasB=gb+qcg@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: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:59:52 -0000

I'm really surprised to see how discussions diverges on this list !

The problem statement is very simple:

1) How many people on this list saying that SPF is bad have TXT
records published on their domains ? Why do you use it in real life
and deplore it here ?

2) How many people on this list that use SPF have only one TXT record
at the top domain and remain relaxed having [?~-]all, ignoring this
thread ?

I accept that some of you don't mind that a third party can use your
subdomains to send forged emails claiming that are from you. I
personally don't like that and applied the fix !

I repeat, this thread started discussing an SPF problem and then
derived in a lot of other problems. We can discuss any, but please
don't blame it on SPF of all of them !

over and out!