> And it seems none of the extra requirements do anything against spam, because the spammers can (and do, see above) easily implement all of those.
I get the impression you can't see the forest for the trees. These methods being easy to implement is exactly the goal. Once majority of mail is properly authenticated more effective methods can be used to fight spam as content-based filtering is increasingly difficult, sender-based will get somewhat more attention.
These two errors from an another thread on this list are a great example:> 421-4.7.28 Gmail has detected an unusual rate of unsolicited mail originating from your SPF domain [userdomain.tld 15]. To protect our users from spam, mail sent from your domain has been temporarily rate limited. For more information, go to https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedRateLimitError to review our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines. o13-20020a056870200d00b002033c710f0asi2122725oab.109 - gsmtp
> 421-4.7.28 Gmail has detected an unusual rate of unsolicited mail originating from your DKIM domain [ 15]. To protect our users from spam, mail sent from your domain has been temporarily rate limited. Please visit https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedRateLimitError to review our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines. y5-20020a056808130500b003b3eaa2eb4esi890433oiv.53 - gsmtp
Anyways, it's about time hosts start punishing lack of DKIM (more). Best regards, Taavi Eomäe
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
