IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC'ed reports, was Forensic report loops are a problem

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Tue, 02 February 2021 01:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@fresheez.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 AFC913A1668 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 17:58:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.751
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mtcc.com
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 ahKWwApCuPK4 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 17:58:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1035.google.com (mail-pj1-x1035.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1035]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DE003A1667 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 17:58:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1035.google.com with SMTP id nm1so1281803pjb.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 17:58:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mtcc.com; s=fluffulence; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=R2ubTZrrXM6ZZqo1EmT5YxY+CKDdFFzWdo4VJ8Sp5RM=; b=Q0B7tzzIfvOQseHqeAgLmWSBKk0UeUKaa6/uTtQ7Tprdck5yoOVDVtgf7avbBCRFrO i14TpzlmVS/8J9s2xfrNgSqSUUsDXRSM5bRtT9VSiYV5+N6EWT0r9yr7ueqkEA/HjB4E /rBjWruH9Q45JZRqI9BcLF+lgAKGaTZVFeroM+Ek74P0GCrBnwcqIzTUVFJEv81DnBve CKLgxS5mvHbmk19r0zSXymXDcD3IpryDZpJu9GNmdtPnoFW5V70hbSbFRy7qFtdD9RYE vdSyU3auV7fpjo+brKex8M4kF/87A6TvhoSZGI7sE3BFtij2FxBCoSWpBPfLB7TcLeJ3 DQqw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=R2ubTZrrXM6ZZqo1EmT5YxY+CKDdFFzWdo4VJ8Sp5RM=; b=ho6t9ZKtzCwXPM4+tg2HzJqazighhsgEimBwvtPaxU8bmj05M0bYyUMpaWg0RSHOEC V8KBpwXQA4l9hK+svZcXrVS4sFoi7v21E8jioA7v3iGO0DLJpnQRWmpwhhXUrhrL/Myq q+zihHQv4DFOygJbOiowroV/l1i8v4mksAOwhaJZ1PHJ1DI1ekZoNkSZK24++LT91u6A Hy8DZhBawZsxklzkSv2VWdfNuQ3wUJnGZP/75cQn07LqbOOe5jTv/jCjropoaTbfFbsd fTPIl0OkW0c5aFmydomocZRfWmNI8hYJq0Uvg5luxscn8teLHuNDYAtMJ31ebdlKjt6G 16cA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530H9zIxhxasJnaZ5KDzvT5t2n/OCAiDkZsrs4Q5vvQlPkc498/a 8D2SXUritA3f4Vd08ig/jATJ4BZOmxVlAA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwByRugyYF21aVUZV6UAZ0PVPbF2UHhyp30QU3ztWt6c1Jeu0JfxZqIGftjfyW7tYiKRw6hGg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:d317:: with SMTP id p23mr1749393pju.14.1612231105605; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 17:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-37-188.volcanocom.com. [107.182.37.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6sm19096384pfz.34.2021.02.01.17.58.24 for <dmarc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Feb 2021 17:58:25 -0800 (PST)
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20210201232105.1931D6D20971@ary.qy> <41163cd5-be81-6fd7-07dd-7a474874429e@gmail.com> <92b361a1-d9a5-9389-46b-3725d885c02@taugh.com> <b83c7574-3aa9-bd39-1a9b-3be6fa4f47ec@gmail.com>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <f28780c0-8533-3a49-d5e3-99fcbbb446ed@mtcc.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 17:58:23 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b83c7574-3aa9-bd39-1a9b-3be6fa4f47ec@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/6SxmJKE_3N05PE6oPVZSULmESuU>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC'ed reports, was Forensic report loops are a problem
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: Tue, 02 Feb 2021 01:58:28 -0000

On 2/1/21 5:42 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 2/1/2021 5:38 PM, John R Levine wrote:
>> So I would say that from my small sample, a lot of people have 
>> figured out how to send aligned reports,
>
> and, to be thorough, some/alot have not.
>
This, on the other hand, should be measurable. Saying that we should 
ignore authentication requirements should require extraordinary proof 
that it is needed for practical as well as security reasons. The burden 
of proof is on the nay-sayers, especially since it is so trivial to 
implement these days.

Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email