Re: [Asrg] whitelisting links (was Re: misconception in SPF)

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 11 December 2012 15:29 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 41C8321F8778 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 07:29:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.425
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.425 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.474, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 bjejm7aFr03p for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 07:29:17 -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 9219A21F8762 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 07:29:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 98501 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2012 15:29:16 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 11 Dec 2012 15:29:16 -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=50c7514b.xn--btvx9d.k1212; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=5FqZ7vDaZlc/69aj3YZ91fHQ2sNIP1CiflDMhUgKBJI=; b=Dny+LSV8SlYirE0e1eCx6eN3mI6rq7epshBpnlb2JqmfFtJIW26Y7KwPRLQNAcJdizs1kN/JV58UYglsmzjfDYFwkdxyjNWYn7QO1HqgTtJUUIjSOUsZNOpV6kLXe7WcGAPoYpNXI+UAeRstVMxdWIEoHTiXbJjSlQqU/tO08+o=
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=50c7514b.xn--btvx9d.k1212; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=5FqZ7vDaZlc/69aj3YZ91fHQ2sNIP1CiflDMhUgKBJI=; b=FCqP744Yx+AsYT4RB944s8W+aZW+9b4OHflafQPW050Z+Uphr/Uezh4mevms2H3E57YqHW6mKqVOLz9pvMTqtI6Dygk+83MusVe4UemDEB7/kYlNPOpzvrj/BHNpngIWlB+HkPFCHYCb5+CPz1it+YjiqJQ5p9zze+sknwFKKGs=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Date: 11 Dec 2012 15:28:53 -0000
Message-ID: <20121211152853.21461.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <50C748C7.3080104@jdmc.org>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] whitelisting links (was Re: 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 15:29:18 -0000

>  I highly disagree.  A local bank just hired an outside firm to
>  spam a "newsletter" to their customers in my area. It was quite
>  difficult to tell if it was legitimate, as the bank had published
>  SPF records, yet failed to provide the ip's of the outsourcers
>  servers. And then used the banks domain name as the source.

I think we can all agree that being incompetent is a worst practice.

There are plenty of companies that oursource their advertising and
even a fair number who outsource transactional mail, but get the
domains and SPF and DKIM correct.

Running mail properly is hard, hiring people who know what they're
doing rather than trying to fake it yourself is often a good idea.