[Mimedefang] Streams and MaxRecipientsPerMessage

WBrown at e1b.org WBrown at e1b.org
Tue Apr 19 13:18:56 EDT 2005


mimedefang-bounces at lists.roaringpenguin.com wrote on 04/19/2005 12:24:44 
PM:

> I'm not sure SPF is a good example.  While I'm sure *some* spammers 
> actually thought in terms of "Hey, if I keep using fake addresses, some 
> of them will have SPF records and get me blocked" or even "Whoa, these 
> people are going to start blocking mail without SPF, I'd better add 
> that!" I suspect most of it was due to the misconception that an SPF 
> pass will get you through a filter.

I was using SPF as an example of spammers implementing new technologies 
faster than anyone else.  There's too much inertia for most sites to 
implement it and the fear of breaking something, even with ?all and ~all. 
If a new standard for limiting one recipient per message was adopted, 
spammers would cope, and very quickly.
 
> I'm not saying the motivation won't be there, just that it won't be very 

> strong when there's a guaranteed multi-year transition period in which 
> the old standard will still get the mail through.

As long as the old way works, there will be some that will never upgrade. 

 



More information about the MIMEDefang mailing list