IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Aggregate Reporting - "Not Evaluated" result

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Mon, 24 October 2022 09:48 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 1FB6AC1522B1 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 02:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=tana.it header.b=POAazcNs; dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it header.b=CXAIp7mH
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6C7nFgP_aspi for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 02:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D3DFC14F720 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=epsilon; t=1666604891; bh=CYIXL1UOfcoXiPOW1ypxpDLT/87Jno1K82599LxM8ns=; h=Author:Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=POAazcNsJuds3LXiOmYe1X+zNCyOz99Py0ehlTRXDq+kl56MqPs/2DD5AbeRfBCAF AXEiG9/wiXBX0YHnyfbCA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1666604891; bh=CYIXL1UOfcoXiPOW1ypxpDLT/87Jno1K82599LxM8ns=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=CXAIp7mH1RCCcP/heXYdnl96wvkPc/uad4HA6ks6DLgDM26+VOMjTTYkN6NsGq/M/ BFDIjnhRdy0Ju6vDKfA7fePwN7zFa0Dl5V9XBk+NigVjEjRDg3HwdgftMQJE8pZM38 WR7oLZ+V3D+a3RXGwjdmNpph1jG3FA2KLZGY3oyYHLHCa1eEC7QJiNuOcEVph
Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Aggregate Reporting - "Not Evaluated" result
Author: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC0DF.0000000063565F5B.000059F1; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 11:48:11 +0200
Message-ID: <5822ea32-7e40-fd1c-5d53-181f8f9c6aa6@tana.it>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 11:48:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <9D6D6E80-B0B0-4CAD-B301-B0A17F9C6663@marmot-tech.com> <04FF4BB2-F8F3-4610-B33E-D4004C757E3B@marmot-tech.com> <CAH48Zfx+JPeoaFA4Z2zw982-+BkJcReyjK07u8w69KMSWx8vYQ@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB4351C32D2621D2024B39802BF72A9@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAH48Zfx0B5nvz9B2WJ-uUEeszyaoHbPoc1oubmjnrqo_H3x3Sw@mail.gmail.com> <f0d90ca7-38b7-3a1d-2be9-30cad7bec31c@tana.it> <CAH48ZfxcYFCj_5S7CU+r-d1yypMCOX9=UvLmTCqMNSa_kejycw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYdvk506_L6BjZD2EYWfAyCgLWTgGS3qsV0_=XHC76--Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48ZfxHzEHRGW-Omkj_HotO6kSdUByxhJstQTWn5hpOapYaRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYe+s7BmFcvtNPaWu1i4kv_j=CtqA1DbkusfGk9s4rDYeA@mail.gmail.com> <560ccd88-2217-9e47-f690-6bc413c67ffa@tana.it> <CAH48ZfwYOdYynFRFMZO33iEjZBg2gNy_prG=wfDQjibeAxYS2A@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwao3qeMWj4oh2WgWvDgCctKbz8xuu0w0MUCHHn1i1QBEA@mail.gmail.com>
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwao3qeMWj4oh2WgWvDgCctKbz8xuu0w0MUCHHn1i1QBEA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/0Mk2VjzzC_oGwXYTcSkbl-rkNwg>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Aggregate Reporting - "Not Evaluated" result
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 09:48:19 -0000

On Sun 23/Oct/2022 17:51:24 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 7:03 AM Douglas Foster wrote:
> 
>> Is it not a violation of GDPR to require DMARC participants to collect and
>> transmit data that is not essential to DMARC?
> 
> I am not a lawyer, but my understanding of GDPR is that it seeks to protect
> user data.  DMARC, DKIM, and SPF all deal with domains, not users.


Yes, except failure reports.


Best
Ale
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email