Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > > I remail my email from debian.org machines, I do not forward it. So, I
> > > do not have the problem (I have others, but it is a different story).
> > >
> > > master:~ % cat .procmailrc
> > >
> > > :0
> > > ! [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 06:31:05PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:22:30PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:15:19AM +0100,
> > Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > a message of 47 lines which said:
> >
> > > If you know easy way
On Thu, 04.11.2004 at 00:15:19 +0100, Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand my ISP's rationale which is to reduce virus mails hitting
> ISP's mail server. I also understand that SPF will not be a bullet
> proof against mail forgery.
Please point your ISP to this interview (esp. pag
Hi, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> Uhm, having just read through the supplied URL, I can't agree with the
> sanity of the proposal. It appears to require that headers not be modified
> at all in transit
You can tell it which headers to protect, so that's not a problem.
In theory. Mailing lists do have
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 11:48:29AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:38:20 +1100, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's a question you'll have to ask of Yahoo and the SPF people. My guess
> > is that the pushers of these schemes want their thing adopted for whate
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:22:30PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:15:19AM +0100,
> Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 47 lines which said:
>
> > If you know easy way to avoid this problem exists, please let me
> > know.
>
> I remail my emai
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:38:20 +1100, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's a question you'll have to ask of Yahoo and the SPF people. My guess
> is that the pushers of these schemes want their thing adopted for whatever
> reason (corporate greed, personal gratification, whatever), but
* Matthew Palmer
| See, that's the thing that the FAQ was unclear on. If you don't have to
| sign all headers, then you're OK. I was thinking the attachment of
| Received: headers as being particularly problematic. To quote the FAQ:
|
| "Mailing lists that do not change the content or re-arra
On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 03:15:09PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 10:37:08PM +1100, Matthew Palmer said
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > It gives you traceability and it can be used to prevent joe-jobs.
> > > It's not a silver bullet solut
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 10:37:08PM +1100, Matthew Palmer said
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > It gives you traceability and it can be used to prevent joe-jobs.
> > It's not a silver bullet solution against spam.
>
> And yet it's being touted as one. I predic
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 10:37:08PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > * Matthew Palmer
> > | Uhm, having just read through the supplied URL, I can't agree with the
> > | sanity of the proposal.
> > | It appears to require that heade
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Matthew Palmer
> | Uhm, having just read through the supplied URL, I can't agree with the
> | sanity of the proposal.
>
> | It appears to require that headers not be modified at all in transit
> | (which means that forwarding be
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:15:19AM +0100,
Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 47 lines which said:
> If you know easy way to avoid this problem exists, please let me
> know.
I remail my email from debian.org machines, I do not forward it. So, I
do not have the problem (I have oth
* Matthew Palmer
| Uhm, having just read through the supplied URL, I can't agree with the
| sanity of the proposal.
| It appears to require that headers not be modified at all in transit
| (which means that forwarding becomes impossible),
Uhm, which headers are modified by a forwarding agent?
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 09:59:44AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Osamu Aoki
>
> | If you know easy way to avoid this problem exists, please let me know.
> | (Changing ISP is certainly an option.)
>
> Use BSTMP to gluck.
>
> (If your ISP can't be whacked into turning it off/Implementing yaho
* Osamu Aoki
| If you know easy way to avoid this problem exists, please let me know.
| (Changing ISP is certainly an option.)
Use BSTMP to gluck.
(If your ISP can't be whacked into turning it off/Implementing yahoo's
DomainKeys proposal, which looks fairly sane to me;
http://antispam.yahoo.com
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 12:15:19AM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I am facing a problem with my ISP started filtering incoming mails with
> SPF. Since AOL adopted it, it seems becoming quite popular as I see it.
[...]
> SPF has known issue with e-mail forwarder such as pobox.com. I think
> debian.o
Hi,
Disclaimer: I am not asking Debian to use SPF[1] to filter incoming ML
posts.
If this has been discussed, excuse me.
I am facing a problem with my ISP started filtering incoming mails with
SPF. Since AOL adopted it, it seems becoming quite popular as I see it.
I understand my ISP's rationa
18 matches
Mail list logo
