In <[email protected]>, on 02/12/2012 at 01:28 AM, "Bank Security" <[email protected]> said:
>To: [email protected] >Cc: [email protected] Please don't do that; one copy is sufficient. >>>I can't conceive of an Internet-based technology that can confirm >>>intent or legitimacy of the signer/author/whatever. >> >>How about a public key in a TXT RR? >OK, what's the intent and legitimacy of this message? How is that relevant? The only TXT RR for banqofamerika.com is the SPF RR. What I was saying was that a technolgy was feasible whereby, e.g., the Return-Path, the From address, was encrypted with a private key and the public key was available in a TXT[1] RR. [1] A different type of RR would work as well. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
