| |||||||||||
That much trouble?That much trouble?Posted Sep 6, 2004 16:03 UTC (Mon) by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688)In reply to: That much trouble? by khim Parent article: Debian rejects Sender ID
> Easy: it's try to reject mail from someone who's pretending he/she
pgp-mail requires you to receive the entire email before making a decision. SPF does not. That saves bandwidth.
SPF isn't covered by a patent. You can use it. It's working now to stop joe-jobs. See this link for a good overview: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=119211&cid=10...
> Yes, it needs some changes in end-user agents, but SPF/SenderID
SPF does not require a change in end-user agents. It can and does work at the MTA level.
(Log in to post comments)
"It's not a bug ... it's a feature" Posted Sep 6, 2004 18:42 UTC (Mon) by freemars (subscriber, #4235) [Link] pgp-mail requires you to receive the entire email before making a decision. SPF does not. That saves bandwidth. The bandwidth costs the spammer (or the major ISP which doesn't block mail from zombied computers) as much as it costs you. You can do your part to drive the cost of spam up. Think of it as a tarpit. Further downthread people are saying how PGP'd spam would do more to hurt encryption than spam; they're probably right (imho).
|
|||||||||||