3 ms·
I do actually resent the way google imposed HTTPS everywhere, but my issues were with the rollout as opposed to the tech. Rant for another day :) But with the
by i_dont_know_ 7y ago
I do actually resent the way google imposed HTTPS everywhere, but my issues were with the rollout as opposed to the tech. Rant for another day :)
But with the security/encryption/signing for email... yeah, if it was just an "on" switch somewhere, I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, setting up SPF for something like exim isn't very straightforward at all. It's flipping LOTS of "on" switches in lots of different places, generating and copying keys around, setting permissions on all the files properly, testing etc. It turns into a legitimate project fairly quickly, and it's hard to prove that this is a better method than just really well-trained spam filters. So, basically, it ends up being by Google fiat that I had to do that project.
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y agoNitpick: you appear to be describing dkim; SPF is a single setting in a single DNS record (per sending domain) and requires no modifications on the sending server
- tssva 7y agoAre you thinking of DKIM? SPF only requires configuring a DNS entry. Also DKIM did not start with Google. DKIM was originally the work of Yahoo and Cisco. Yahoo, now OATH, has a patent covering it.