[Accountability!] RE: SPF abused by spammers

["Gordon Fecyk" <gordonf@xxxxxxxxx>]

> >   Replace "sent" with "accepted responsibility for", and MAIL FROM
> > checking is perfectly valid, if all parties agree.
> 
> How do you arrive at publishing an SPF record being tantamount to
> accepting accountability for all actions of these authorized 
> entities? 

When I jumped into this little game I did so with the goal of:

========================
RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY
========================

There, just so it's clear what I'm thinking, in case it wasn't clear every
other time I've used the word "accountability" or "accountable" in an e-mail.

Yes, this means knowing who to point fingers at for mail abuse.  It would
also mean fingering a domain administration who, wittingly or otherwise,
allows a compromised system to send abusive mail on its behalf (and,
hopefully, would correct that compromise somehow.)

I wasn't aware that this working group shifted from that goal.  Has it?

-- 
PGP key (0x0AFA039E): <http://www.pan-am.ca/consulting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sometimes it's hard to tell where the game ends and where reality bites,
er, begins. <http://vmyths.com/resource.cfm?id=50&page=1>