IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] auth-res vs. dmarc

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Wed, 30 December 2020 14:48 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 1B4143A0BDF for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 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=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 9zh35ijJa8U0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) (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 0BCD03A0BDE for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id s15so8748334plr.9 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:16 -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-language; bh=FYi1iSSPLZtAae/2xrOARJqtpT1dPi3lyyKT57hdYTY=; b=YCzQaxjfqVy6po/WdYMX7s+ngm5ZNyjs8528FDKJJTDKvLiDsA3dbs5WPq+EMO7ex8 3JaZ9ViLStCcrZePx9809/OrLZtXEr02RTMCrZzRgOYaM34wN+kLVKrffoJHfhU50VPt vDP5MJhMU+iC+rVBKGCBwRcyk2LwHIH+u8h1gylCX/lWox3iA/6YMC7T0dycRt1Q9KdP 26gQm3Cllcakjsiwjj6g5FysU9uknQtaEB3tPsqxfEL7YTRWl0+7jHr6KlS72LQHYXd+ cxwbSc8Y9G7xKzO2cVa1uJzQI2m7ZxoVYi9ke465Ff0uXBPkXfc4mb8NlKMrm85a/IUR dDeg==
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-language; bh=FYi1iSSPLZtAae/2xrOARJqtpT1dPi3lyyKT57hdYTY=; b=DRdBaZVQwyXRet0rb9SnE5tJ6veisDa3hntq2JVhGVRM5JUpUHp27M6DYYxdAzM8iP VEaaXjgVEtfV5QGzuASKG8ftVJFTZDAtuoZ6a0ejzFSmy3hp1udP5X/s/BriPcIH+JWR 3p1wAnU1LxZoJJuQZRQJfvH8pmQ3QcFR45Ll0gvHT87XRJh2nWFAT8vLlLRH8Er1ZhqU s3zGSW0N4AGMqU3YckIs4SRpvVKWCB/DOA9aMKAX81C3dtRtd6LLkKWHssvGvx+NvW9K IXJduLavVbv+zZvdGYmquWZjsEjxeRRIQbjl2Ni+ciJM8QXDUR6+2y9hD88eSVKxIy33 FPqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5320HnebfV/UTqlWpamHVmOI7UOeF5oYyKwyYWm8NlYPY/DtZPkI nKgav7IBLPscwM6VOMB+1zKm9r7WIEjNvw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwwdoojexG0D2DI4FNAWVGqwx48ctS+FkNH9fM059M7ubs5dyNCIXd5R1EQN9dAxQT1/OUHEw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6b0a:b029:dc:31af:8dc3 with SMTP id o10-20020a1709026b0ab02900dc31af8dc3mr31171735plk.41.1609339695989; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-45-95.volcanocom.com. [107.182.45.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a10sm41836724pfi.168.2020.12.30.06.48.14 for <dmarc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:15 -0800 (PST)
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <9f6782b1-e85b-1a9c-9151-98feff7e18ea@mtcc.com> <CAHej_8m0OWsTt+tcSgUh+Fxu=HH_57nsb2O1Q_fgA2453ceh4g@mail.gmail.com> <140485eb-020f-4406-3f2f-e2c475ea51e5@mtcc.com> <CAHej_8mApfoF2ORgL+DoYTanrdhMjvT9H27kORwLKCQc1C9sRw@mail.gmail.com> <5588dbbe-b876-ed80-c80f-792380e3718f@mtcc.com> <CAHej_8=kW_t_JkOxUud1Uz8+PrbMh5CfwfxZK=mhe0wjW8wQpw@mail.gmail.com> <54dd9978-bcd1-6757-ad27-dcef6db6e5f7@mtcc.com> <CAHej_8kCi=7oqojDH_rbjn7kRg-PTDJWLgcKTGK9z-baUnKeMw@mail.gmail.com> <ef32de1e-d47e-1d0f-3cec-5994c7fdb7ae@mtcc.com> <CAHej_8kjSsQK_XEbdjWzV5npa29YjGadzD06Fmx3QLB4p+n_Cg@mail.gmail.com> <937f1019-a028-308d-2a0f-1e720fd49dcd@mtcc.com> <d8014c2a-c1c9-9eac-e64a-5f285bab7fd3@tana.it> <CAHej_8mgYr9ERAxmup+keZT5u8L+qgCxcSLH7Z=BEuZLouttpg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <190eb548-fd21-559a-1441-faabbfcefdc0@mtcc.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:14 -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: <CAHej_8mgYr9ERAxmup+keZT5u8L+qgCxcSLH7Z=BEuZLouttpg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------804C7906588894D161479327"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/IDf5qOBdbwnhby7cjd_yf8qktdw>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] auth-res vs. dmarc
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: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 14:48:18 -0000

On 12/30/20 5:48 AM, Todd Herr wrote:
>
> Third-party MUAs perhaps won't, but MUAs aren't really responsible for 
> message disposition in a way that is relevant to DMARC's primitive 
> disposition choices, except in those cases where they're POP clients 
> that download everything to a local message store, I guess; maybe in 
> that case DMARC policy request and DMARC validation results could be 
> used to make the Inbox v. Spam decision.
>
This is a failure of imagination. If spam filters are too worried about 
false positives to take action on p=reject and p=quarantine, that 
doesn't mean a human can't. Imagine three colors, green, orange and red. 
If I see red, I am immediately suspicious of it and treat it as suspect 
when evaluating the context and semantics in the message -- something 
that spam filters do not do. Same to a lesser degree orange. If auth-res 
provided me the proper information, I could do that today. I cannot 
because it does not. As it stands today, auth-res is useless for DMARC.

Mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email