Re: Anyone using SPF/SRS/SenderID ?

[Jesse Thompson <jesse.thompson () DOIT WISC EDU>]

I've yet to see a real benefit to these techniques.

At the moment, I am pinning my hopes on DKIM, merely as a way to 
implement whitelisting.

https://spaces.internet2.edu/display/ddx/

Jesse

On 1/5/2010 5:43 PM, Andrew Daviel wrote:
> Following the hype a few years back, I created an SPF record for us.
> But because of the problems with road warriors and mail forwarding, it's
> still set to "neutral".
>
> I've had SRS on my to-do list for a while, and was just looking at a
> project which integrates SRS into sendmail.
>
> Is anyone actually using this, or is it a technology of interest only to
> bulk mailers ? (I understand that many universities are also bulk
> mailers, but I guess they may outsource this)
>
>
> If I understand this stuff correctly, our SPF record says "mail from
> example.com may or may not come from 192.168/16", because
> 1) some users are on sabbatical at example.ac.uk, and mail out via
> 172.16/12
> as joe () example com
> 2) users from example.ac.uk on sabbatical here may forward mail
> from bert () example com to bert () example ac uk, which will see it coming
> from 192.168/16 instead of the original domain
> 3) users from Britain on sabbatical in Japan have mail for
> ann () example ac uk forwarded to ann () example ac jp.
> If fred () example com mails ann () example ac uk, example.ac.jp will
> see it coming from 172.16/12 not 192.168/16
>
> #1 we can fix through education. Many people now use webmail which
> sidesteps the issue
> #2 we can fix with SRS which rewrites the return path
> #3 we have no control over. If we set our SPF record to "fail" then we
> need example.ac.uk to implement SRS otherwise example.ac.jp could reject
> mail from fred () example com as spam
>
>
> https://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/apr07/04-18SenderIDPR.mspx
> "Sender ID Framework Reaches Tipping Point"
> http://www.openspf.org/SRS
> http://www.openspf.org/
>
> (I see that senderID and SPF are different but confused to the point of
> senderID potentially borking some SPF users :-( )
> senderID I think requires forwarders to add a "Sender" or "Resent-From"
> header, but I haven't fully checked.

--
  Jesse Thompson
  Division of Information Technology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Email/IM: jesse.thompson () doit wisc edu

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