rachelsfx
join:2004-09-27
Pensacola, FL | M$ just offering something to keep Regulators happy
-Nuff said. |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY | I wonder....
What will happen if you wrongly get placed on this black list, will you have a easy way of getting reinstated or is it going to be a nightmare.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind. |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter Pipeline
2 edits | What's the point?
Why add another layer of "authentication" simply because it's tied to a corporate name? What happened to SPF records?
SPF is open, free and barely used (correctly by servers and host records). MS pushing this type of authentication will only further annoy DNS admins by making sure it's "done right" fall on the shoulders of SBS 2003 owners...the core people that still send mail out as "some-company.local"
Spam is a less a problem of preventing it, and more a problem of people thinking they configured their end correctly.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| said by DaSneaky1D  :Why add another layer of "authentication" simply because it's tied to a corporate name? What happened to SPF records? SPF is open, free and barely used (correctly by servers and host records). MS pushing this type of authentication will only further annoy DNS admins by making sure it's "done right" fall on the shoulders of SBS 2003 owners...the core people that still send mail out as "some-company.local" Spam is a less a problem of preventing it, and more a problem of people thinking they configured their end correctly. SPF has the old "chicken or the egg" problem I think.
We use it on all our domains and only Google actually checks the SPF record. Out of thousands of emails being sent across the country from our mail servers, I only see SPF queries from Google on sent emails (gmail). Sad.
It almost makes it completely worthless.
I hope because this has the Microsoft name behind it, more people will take notice and/or MS will create an easy way to integrate it with Exchange. |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| No system will be embraced by all....
I think its safe to say that spam is a problem with email. Everyone hates it. Everyone wants something done about it. The problem is that the current system right now is not going to be able to be secured to eliminate or remove spam. Therefore, the system has to change.
Every system that has been proposed has been shot down quickly for one reason or the other. Charging a fraction of a penny for emails? Nope, email should be free. SenderID? Maybe too much of a hastle to get removed from the blackhole list?
Just seems to me that everyone wants a system that has no spam, but no one wants to change to get there. Seems that everyone is waiting for a magic system to be implemented that will have everything we have now, just without the spam. I just don't forsee that happening.
So along we trudge with what we have right now....
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to rachelsfx
Re: M$ just offering something to keep Regulators happy
said by rachelsfx :-Nuff said. More likely to try and get legit companies marketing pitches past the spam filters that are blocking their emails. Sometimes, pitches from companies like Ford or Toyota are thrown into the SPAM folder in gmail. I'll bet this is MS's way of trying to get major ISP's onboard so those emails can go thru.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
Nanoprobe
Crunching in subspace
Premium
join:2003-05-11
Crab Nebula
clubs: 
 ·Skype
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to Nightfall
Re: No system will be embraced by all....
FWIW you could do what I and many others do. Spend $9.95 a year for Mailwasher Pro, set your filters and rules, and get no spam ever. It's not a perfect answer but it's better then what is in place now and worth every penny.
--
Resistance is Futile |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| said by Nanoprobe :FWIW you could do what I and many others do. Spend $9.95 a year for Mailwasher Pro, set your filters and rules, and get no spam ever. It's not a perfect answer but it's better then what is in place now and worth every penny. This isn't a question of what 3rd party software or service you use. This is all about the system of email and finding a solution to spam and viruses being distributed over them. I could chime in with how I use postini at work, spamassassin at home, and go on and on about other software packages. The simple fact of the matter is that none of those things fix the problem. They just put a bandaid over a deep cut that is gushing blood. It may patch it, but it doesn't fix the problem of the infection.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to Matt
Re: What's the point?
I see your point. I rarely have custs that ask to have a SPF record added to their domain, but those that do often have more problems than it's worth.
Of note, I had one cust that, due to his record, stopped receiving bounced emails because the receiving server simply dropped it.
Sure, maybe with integration with Exchange the spam problem may decrease, but I'm awfully doubtful. So many other areas that need to be secured, this is almost like pushing the processing load off to something else.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: |
|
Nanoprobe
Crunching in subspace
Premium
join:2003-05-11
Crab Nebula
clubs: | reply to Nightfall
Re: No system will be embraced by all....
Where in my post did I say it would fix the problem? What I said was it is a relatively cheap alternative to curbing spam being delivered to you until something better comes along.
--
Resistance is Futile |
|
elvey
Spamassassin
join:2001-02-17
San Francisco, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
2 edits | Same Shit, Different Day?
Umm.... How does this address the objections folks had, e.g. the APACHE SOFWARE FOUNDATION:
»www.apache.org/foundation/docs/s···on.html?
Microsoft is STILL refusing to provide a license that (according to Microsoft) is GPL compatible!
Oh, and the comment below by BetaNews is nonsense. These folks were coaxed into backing SenderID years ago.
In a sign that Microsoft’s move may thaw the ice at least partly, IronPort and Sendmail both signed onto Microsoft’s Sender ID announcement this morning. Yes, I'm biased; I support CSV and DKIM. |
|
