Noone is interested in the battle with spam.. we all just want a clean inbox. :)
I agree with most of your points, and I know the weakness of requiring everyone to participate for RMX based defense to work. Still, if it was relied on strictly enough by a significant enough portion of the internet, the pressure to get your RMX RR right or perish would be significant. Even if only the large mail hubs (Hotmail, Yahoo and the many other freemailers) which are frequently used as forged senders implemented this (on both directions, their own RMX RR as well as requiring them from senders) that would be a step forward.
A problem in general is that non-adherence to protocols is not currently punished (enough); which means neither spammers nor half the population of the internet make any effort to adhere. However, even if adherence were enforced, it still wouldn't be that hard to forge a sender address - which is where RMX comes in.
Makeshifts last the longest.
In reply to Re^2: (OT) Fighting spam (use a layered defense)
by Aristotle
in thread (OT) Fighting spam
by Aristotle
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |