cords ending in '+all' ), or
spammers operating from compromised hosts. Such spam tends to turn up in
short bursts and then subside pretty quickly, is low in volume overall
(23 spams from the last two weeks in my deleted folder), and generally
gets hosed by SpamAssassin in any case.
Overall I'm happy with the way it works; my spam volumes are pretty low,
and the drawbacks fairly minor from my perspective.
Also of interest is
http://spf-all.com/ which lets you look up the
published SPF record for any domain, and has some fun stats.
--
Phil Stewart
From alex@??? Sat Jul 14 23:20:46 2012
Received: from goatse.co.uk ([85.214.55.250] ident=postfix)
by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <alex@???>) id 1SqBdl-000822-Rm
for users@???; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:20:46 +0000
Received: by goatse.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 65534)
id 6949C112C038; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 00:10:52 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [10.18.56.229] (unknown [82.132.218.206])
by goatse.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89C23112C035;
Sun, 15 Jul 2012 00:10:50 +0100 (BST)
References: <50017F1C.7050609@???> <5001BB0D.6030804@???>
In-Reply-To: <5001BB0D.6030804@???>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <48BDF33F-036B-4137-9CBA-EB2B98656D0D@???>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206)
From: Alex Smith <alex@???>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 00:10:47 +0100
To: Phil Stewart <phil.stewart@???>
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Sat,
14 Jul 2012 23:20:45 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 85.214.55.250
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: alex@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
spamd0.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-ASN: AS6724 85.214.0.0/15
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,SPF_PASS
shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
* 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:51:10 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.bitfolk.com)
Cc: "users@???" <users@???>
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Bitfolk SpamAssassin / SPF
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users of BitFolk hosting <users.lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/options/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.bitfolk.com/lurker/list/users.html>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:20:46 -0000
On 14 Jul 2012, at 19:31, Phil Stewart <phil.stewart@???> wrote:
> On 14/07/2012 15:15, Nigel Rantor wrote:
>>=20
>> So, I receive mail that would be killed by SPF checks and I'm thinking of=
getting my exim server to use SPF because of this.
>>=20
>> So, to the VPS users, I was wondering if anyone who has implemented SPF c=
hecks found downsides to it?
>=20
> An initial disclaimer: I firewall port 22 by country of origin, so pretty m=
uch all email originating from address blocks allocated to China, Russia, an=
d a couple of others are blocked
25 or 22?=
From phil.stewart@??? Sun Jul 15 09:11:43 2012
Received: from [2001:ba8:1f1:f00a::2] (helo=maltose.turbinado.co.uk)
by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_
