Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields
Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sat, 06 June 2020 20:33 UTC
Return-Path: <sklist@kitterman.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 671113A0C26 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 13:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_FAIL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b=EVtKolQp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=Um5JXKkj
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sGwQP58I1Z_e for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 13:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1248C3A0C21 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 13:33:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20EF0F80230; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 16:33:00 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1591475579; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=DKLU1LSP94pHCAQ6IXMRjN0H9jB7RzRopb5vMV8A3MU=; b=EVtKolQpl8MIKBom++wv6TFKyowcCaE0/POl1TjebYM98xMe8wKFfb2bZQ0sJzCsvejJ3 3fl/vKU23XAQnrzDQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1591475579; h=date : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : subject : to : from : message-id : from; bh=DKLU1LSP94pHCAQ6IXMRjN0H9jB7RzRopb5vMV8A3MU=; b=Um5JXKkjLfmxLKYnO1lSQF+3bmwoxz+oJ5CDNENZMPbBGi1UY0tA6s6I15RHLH/iN70Qd +QTbitydxYAgwVFgoTNynhbZ8CWnSqXxQRjh1UHu2kVWJYrbGFNZas8tICevRkWvx7/P/nQ zvJp1p806PJKmYaLkM2T8pJom0/hc9mPvJEOaKy7/4hKus/c66WKKSkDYGAkkHpzAnNeNPb TBVAnc5J6a9Yn3E2fIviCmeHj3TZNFkW3+f6s7ncgkLv2/36r9p0txzr1YbjnhQU1JuAcOB See60O5MZHwrZQIoeEP/yWLPFf7NcMKAvUKShCZyLH0QiEcA28LnpSy+6IeA==
Received: from [192.168.1.184] (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D040DF801DD; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 16:32:59 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 20:32:57 +0000
In-Reply-To: <049dac36-6be6-aa99-ccf7-e68da4a240f9@bluepopcorn.net>
References: <DM5PR0601MB367115AD49513EAF3953716CF68B0@DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <CAJ4XoYdt-8D65ajLLDGoNBqUB7+juWvWSdaO+PJPZpBbE6eeZg@mail.gmail.com> <faeccaf0-359e-74bb-2683-6a2b9ad50364@bluepopcorn.net> <83781802.4yxyyzPtoS@sk-desktop> <049dac36-6be6-aa99-ccf7-e68da4a240f9@bluepopcorn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: dmarc@ietf.org
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Message-ID: <F312F1CC-4CCC-4510-83E3-4010AECF7916@kitterman.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/-jXpWFAme-al5uILiJt3hC5AJmE>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 20:33:04 -0000
On June 6, 2020 7:25:56 PM UTC, Jim Fenton <fenton@bluepopcorn.net> wrote: >On 6/5/20 3:37 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> On Friday, June 5, 2020 5:26:19 PM EDT Jim Fenton wrote: >>> >>> So maybe the core question here is, does the identity in the domain >name >>> matter or not? It does to me personally because I look at it >(whenever I >>> can -- my iPhone doesn't make it easy to display) and I pay >attention to >>> it. But I know I'm not a typical user, and I also see increasing >>> evidence of mail client software that doesn't show anything but the >>> Friendly Name. So is there a "brand" associated with the email >domain >>> name any more? >>> >>> If the domain name doesn't matter, the binding to the From/Signer >>> address doesn't either. >> If the domain name didn't matter, no one would bother to use 'real' >domains in >> abusive mail. They demonstrably do, so while one might have >differences of >> opinion about how important they are (every MUA I use displays them, >so let's >> also not draw too hasty conclusions about them not being displayed) I >don't >> think it's a supportable that they don't matter. > >And I receive a good deal of email with friendly names like "DHL >Express" or the names of friends (who apparently have suffered address >book compromise) but completely unrelated domain names. > >I phrased my comment as a question because I really don't know the >answer to this, and have been reading comments from people asserting >opinions on both sides. It would simplify the discussion if the WG >could >reach rough consensus on this. And if the domain name doesn't matter, >the WG really needs to rethink the utility of DMARC. I think the market has spoken on the utility of DMARC. Scott K
- [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Pete Resnick
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Pete Resnick
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Seth Blank
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Stan Kalisch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with R… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Дилян Палаузов
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] About user notification in the M… Stan Kalisch