IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #55 - Clarify legal and privacy implications of failure reports

Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com> Sat, 02 January 2021 18:53 UTC

Return-Path: <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.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 949E93A0CE9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:53:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 waoB3coeKvoJ for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:53:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d]) (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 771DB3A0CE7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Jan 2021 10:53:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com with SMTP id d23so5283525vkf.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Jan 2021 10:53:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LxUvMMxUsJP5TIPNJc7vMX7iE2M/MkilfTdQ4B5ywfA=; b=TfmIrOoy3dHPUdd7yN5yermqU2oRPBzaH6nIsTpWb9BMc5TjrRUPI2xZt+TTHASaZt XU334MyL9wD3Oae2tg/3N2Giw9OkNd5jja95WWkVJy59JoVlIG79prmoE/TwHD3+gJD3 qGE6aTxdW3kXSU6vWkLtsFhIvNpf8o4n+/6qrhjEpHTv8NZDJmsiWMx82KKYtX2D8zqt CuL1hh7kyzs/lojqpdWLR+9t+clzt0k0weWjtYaNbfRH91tjbOxGpfJNrhK1PI5AucRn ShTwXEVBiPsXqGH5nvJdT0XZyfO2In/3gtU4jzKJJ8ppH8GT7HmzdsFS4TnzsV/roVGM TDzQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=LxUvMMxUsJP5TIPNJc7vMX7iE2M/MkilfTdQ4B5ywfA=; b=l7XEenP8Mzt486SBJ+wk8dtWC6dg6L1eDnWPWu2ewL1gBoCx2iylJ7VcuZc/k0HBR6 DU++vUFnH0ZIWHHEmCtHWm1nnEkD8/MrK09OQPcb6nj+3YMZj1eDmVjB7fKVwB5vBhjl X8cF2/BCxDF/7IqUnr+492DhclSbKHZrMBuX0ySDqFzaBc5sSEQ5wa+UfMQxz5GZy5Cl oyatfxYxU+jAc1zVFjNqRu/2mWpwLT7E4r9PTJ/C2YNWu6npO9Qh32ZoIe06mj2qUcjD 4lWUYedYb6a1ylsmzljyfvMd8sDf2KOUx588KqPcm/koNOqOQGvrsyz2aa+7xb5izhZK U7qA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532pqRrodcAFVx0G9rN7kqBJrrkNyemKqyNvC3CmacIw6VuBWcAm US6yoXFI2QAWPio3e9tzWVLORlR8muGS+DYpqWkZT8Va6dE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzKGJD53s4l5DwI4tgAYAGyvzYgjgeDTo+et7kBpfJ6hpbFsUksTX0YtKzxIkeWW5hl/xuD0/Q8FyWljRoPuhY=
X-Received: by 2002:ac5:cde4:: with SMTP id v4mr19903863vkn.21.1609613632403; Sat, 02 Jan 2021 10:53:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201231160030.20AFB3EE7AD7@ary.qy> <4bd444a4-0c34-467a-cfcb-a8f7c14b723d@tana.it> <b030d1f-44d4-4330-eb17-c930eb968be2@taugh.com>
In-Reply-To: <b030d1f-44d4-4330-eb17-c930eb968be2@taugh.com>
From: Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2021 13:53:41 -0500
Message-ID: <CAH48ZfzDkz4iS2k-+8_-zW-y4m+c1dhRMvPQZmpbLLG2KY0eGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c8fb0905b7ef6028"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/DZlcsKLRbATBS5HEaV7xhfSrXTk>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #55 - Clarify legal and privacy implications of failure reports
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, 02 Jan 2021 18:53:56 -0000

Regarding this section:

   Experience with DMARC has revealed some issues of interoperability
   with email in general that require due consideration before
   deployment, particularly with configurations that can cause mail to
   be rejected.  These are discussed in Section 9.

I suggest replacing it with a scope statement, such as this:

DMARC checks are applicable when a message is received directly from
the domain owner, or received indirectly from a mediator without
in-transit modification.  As discussed in Section 9, these two
criteria do not cover all legitimate email flows.   When a message is
received indirectly with modification, DMARC cannot produce a usable
result, and the message should be evaluated using alternate criteria.
 When messages may have been forwarded with modifications, the
algorithm for distinguishing between authorized and unauthorized
messages becomes difficult to define.



On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 12:51 PM John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> >> The main effect is that the mail they'd been sending from their ESP
> >> with their Yahoo address on the From: line used to work, and now falls
> >> on the floor or worse.
> >
> > Why can't the ESPs do From: rewriting?
>
> To what?  The Yahoo address is the only address the scout troop has?
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email