[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: User experience



Matthew Elvey wrote:


SPF on its own, as currently written will have no medium or long term impact on spam other than joe-jobs and bounces and bandwidth.
The same is true for the non-open Microsoft and Yahoo derivatives.
That's why I started the "[Asrg] LMAP: RHSBLs better than what we have now?" thread.

Doug Royer allegedly said:
>Benefit - saves time by allowing automated tools to track spam sources.

><I can write tools that always get contact information given a domain name, but can't given an IP. \


I believe that's false. Both ARIN et. al. info and domain info is fairly often bogus.

Thank for quoting me accurately. Yes, I can write such a tool :-)

I never said that sometimes some of the information is a lie.

Registrars ignore blatantly false info in both, unless there's been a recent change I'm not aware of.
So I don't believe switching from one to the other is likely to to be a benefit.

Would you agree that it allows tracking to the spam source of an infected machine
where the owner is honest?

--

Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
-------------------------------|-----------------------------
Doug@xxxxxxxxx                 | Office: (208)520-4044
http://Royer.com/People/Doug   | Fax:    (866)594-8574
                              | Cell:   (208)520-4044

We Do Standards - You Need Standards


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature