[185546] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Uptick in spam
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ian Smith)
Tue Oct 27 09:08:02 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <562F70B8.1090702@netzwerklabor.at>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:08:00 -0400
From: Ian Smith <ian.w.smith@gmail.com>
To: Jutta Zalud <ju@netzwerklabor.at>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
But that's not how SPF works. In SPF, the domain of the envelope header
sender address is checked against that domain's sender policy. Since
jdlabs.fr has no policy specified, a strict SPF policy at the NANOG server
would have prevented this small issue.
As for the utility of SPF, well. It's not comprehensive, no one I know
would say that it is. But it's a bit of a stretch to say that has zero
value. It would have prevented this latest bit of fun, which seems to have
people upset, so there's *some* value.
-Ian
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jutta Zalud <ju@netzwerklabor.at> wrote:
> Am 27.10.2015 13:09, schrieb Ian Smith:
> <snip>
> If it does (which I don't know), it will probably check the SPF record
> of the delivering mailserver, which was not *.jdlabs.fr as far as I can
> see from the mailheaders.
>
> Jutta Zalud
>
