5 ms·
This is cool. I like how simple it is. Also, I just learned about SPF records from this. I didn't realize there was a DNS related[0] mechanism of preventing spa
by alexggordon 11y ago
This is cool. I like how simple it is. Also, I just learned about SPF records from this. I didn't realize there was a DNS related[0] mechanism of preventing spam. Kinda neat.
As an alternative to this, if you'd like a little finer grained information about it spam filters from specific companies, Litmus (I'm not affiliated) has a really cool spam-test[1] that actually tests it against all major spam filters (Google, Yahoo, etc) instead of testing it against spam lists like this does.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework
[1] https://litmus.com/spam-filter-tests https://litmus.com/spam-filter-tests
- aianus 11y agoDKIM is better (SPF doesn't prevent, for example, Amazon SES impersonating you and sending out unauthorized email on your behalf)
- noinsight 11y agoNeither actually prevents anything because it's up to the recipient ('s server) to apply whatever scrutiny they feel like.
- hobarrera 11y agoDMARC actually specifies exactly what the recipient should test and what they should to with the email. They can easily ignore DMARC records, but at least you're still telling them what to do with failing email.