Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sun, 09 December 2012 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 4770B21F8C54 for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:09:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 aiTm+t41TDGm for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:09:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B059921F8C08 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:09:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.9] (adsl-67-127-190-125.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.190.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qB9G9F1U017080 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:09:15 -0800
Message-ID: <50C4B7A7.90102@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 08:09:11 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <20121206212116.10328.qmail@joyce.lan> <50C1A95A.5000001@pscs.co.uk> <50C4A7F8.3010201@dcrocker.net> <CAFdugamTbTirVV2zXKOmc9oTaCS+QiTemhT=jvYJnHYscHQK7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFdugamTbTirVV2zXKOmc9oTaCS+QiTemhT=jvYJnHYscHQK7g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sun, 09 Dec 2012 08:09:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [Asrg] misconception in SPF
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net, 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: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:09:19 -0000

On 12/9/2012 7:43 AM, Christian Grunfeld wrote:
> When operators believes that SPF and their filtering engines are well
> configurated but a forged email pass anyway (by means of this thread),
> it finally reaches a "semi-tech-savvy user" who is more trusting of
> Twitter mail coming from 'bibble.twitter.com' than if it came from
> 'random.ru'. None of us are saying that simple users deals with SPF
> directly !


Anyone who believes that SPF can 'guarantee' that no forged mail will 
get delivered is suffering a very basic failure in their understanding. 
  No changes to SPF can fix this.

The best line of action is to develop better statements about what SPF 
does and does not do, rather than discuss SPF 'failings'.  That is, try 
to help the understanding of operators.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net