Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [CORE] SPF Record ...

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
Subject: Re: [CORE] SPF Record ...
Date: 2006-11-20 19:43:29
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Huh??  If had an SPF record that stated that only and
> its MXs were authoritative sources of mail for their domain, and I
> send something through as peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, the receiving
> server, if it checks/honors SPF, would end up rejecting it as spam

What does that have to do with anything?  If _you_ send email as 
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net through any host, you are impersonanting.  If I am 
sending any mail through any host other than the one 
designated by I am running afoul of SPF, but I am not 
impersonating.  Those are two completely different things.

This is basically the difference between what return address you write 
on a letter and what postal service you use.  You are presumably a user 
of a Canadian return address (your "domain").  If the "domain owner" 
(the government?) published an "SPF" record declaring that all Canada 
mail must be routed through some carrier or post office, then those 
implementing "SPF" on the other end might be inclined to reject all 
Canada mail coming through another carrier or post office.  But you 
might ask yourself what business the "domain owner" has to say which 
way you send your mail, and note that you can still randomly forge your 
return address.

Peter Eisentraut

In response to

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-11-20 19:44:39
Subject: Re: [CORE] SPF Record ...
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2006-11-20 19:38:37
Subject: PgFoundry is down

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group