IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs

Hector Santos <winserver@icloud.com> Wed, 12 April 2023 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <winserver@icloud.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 AC92BC1516EB for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.076
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.076 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icloud.com
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 iX5ofebbCQfY for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ci74p00im-qukt09081701.me.com (ci74p00im-qukt09081701.me.com [17.57.156.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0936C15153C for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icloud.com; s=1a1hai; t=1681333174; bh=QgbuhMXsz0yhGmIciNxLanzahRzHKtpJ5m5uhHZiCB0=; h=From:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:Message-Id; b=x4I6eG8swzy3UAOyVnBaN8P3PL9g3MiiUm4L8UwmDJUeZV3DxPebXPmMzWrSTQttW DR4xlr1ZknfSOuewGDvrttrRTobQvEHeTC8dE/SpmOYhigU3AQd+aZBxanZbyO6zbZ QSmSRduL9zrlWAx2arv0ac1dpU3QmdISnD73xkuGorHLA2/iC0AZZfJDU80dQvXj0M UB54ke+DkM3Co1Q+w/eJ/RHmLsZ34QiZ44fb0Ku7WwX+8eXt749ZnrejnedPeKCcwv Hxzji4+u65VNh/Q00lcqePN8rdgsOVkWO2mSDOa5ZjUwYQ//3MsTPb06tbN2izWgmk oQSAruvbCuH9Q==
Received: from smtpclient.apple (ci77p00im-dlb-asmtp-mailmevip.me.com [17.57.156.26]) by ci74p00im-qukt09081701.me.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56FD646C085F for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2023 20:59:33 +0000 (UTC)
From: Hector Santos <winserver@icloud.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 16:59:22 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZc2X7tyP+_8vvL3Yb7uJk6td3XGbsXUB68BNUEMhV4yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <CAL0qLwZc2X7tyP+_8vvL3Yb7uJk6td3XGbsXUB68BNUEMhV4yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <DD4C1D56-B198-47A7-8A39-2F934BD985DB@icloud.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.400.51.1.1)
X-Proofpoint-GUID: _ic918rHLXIDsBCqPZ2uHd6IE-AhytzU
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: _ic918rHLXIDsBCqPZ2uHd6IE-AhytzU
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=1.1.170-22c6f66c430a71ce266a39bfe25bc2903e8d5c8f:6.0.138,18.0.572,17.11.62.513.0000000 definitions=2020-02-14_11:2020-02-14_02,2020-02-14_11,2021-12-02_01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=759 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1011 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2212070000 definitions=main-2304120178
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/5c7pnERJwmvRCygOBLfNUipqzwc>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs
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: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 21:32:04 -0000


> On Apr 12, 2023, at 2:15 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I've been thinking about the point a few people have made now that DMARC has two actors that cause the problem: Those who "blindly" apply "p=reject", and those who advertise "p=reject".  You do, indeed, need two to tango; enforcement doesn't happen without an advertising sender and a participating receiver.  Maybe any "MUST NOT" advice we provide needs to cover both ends.  We need to be careful about admonishing participating receivers though.  What would we say to them about how to be selective in application?

Murray, you have RFC 5016 Section 10.3, Item10 as a Functional Specification reinforcement basis for a MUST NOT honor DMARC p=reject that causes 3rd party problems.   Even though 5016 applied to SSP, it applies equally to DMARCbis too.

—
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email