Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields

Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com> Sat, 06 June 2020 21:42 UTC

Return-Path: <sklist@kitterman.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 E18C93A0D62 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=kitterman.com header.b=Pazygqih; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kitterman.com header.b=klKOHQNK
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 ASIEL8KZLEZp for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [64.20.48.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8FFB3A0D61 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from interserver.kitterman.com (interserver.kitterman.com [IPv6:2604:a00:6:1039:225:90ff:feaa:b169]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2523EF80230 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 17:42:38 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903e; t=1591479758; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=8xm7dhwsp58+Z8d3o9FxJ7R7cdXWYNEsg3Ho+2v15/M=; b=Pazygqih+O0sCHkMIqYTsjAaac6cdAGPp6FPELTwv/fzgCubGP/FEeGwevACb/oiUwCw5 tg+taIILAxEeR4DDQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kitterman.com; i=@kitterman.com; q=dns/txt; s=201903r; t=1591479757; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : from; bh=8xm7dhwsp58+Z8d3o9FxJ7R7cdXWYNEsg3Ho+2v15/M=; b=klKOHQNKDhY78u1RPT+WRyDWQe330YWHDS0cTYfIKpeNJSkTkXlc/QXo1VrwaW5Al4ZkT Mj+z3LELXxJQf0OILpeB9VnCa56YjvDNzdyCgXucSvfGuz5FSS941pkkff6rXBGrVVUrekc e2HTm5gPXOtK067jNq9KCnBWkDEhkiWq7NU3kEBFn7nvf8wXPrIldZyjuB0wJHJPbukKbVn jM0YFSKkwMIvXL307HDOYlONHzFg8FFF8PJpj4o5+IjbtdL666Y+W9iRyYC16jdEIN14zLl RtAL183G+By3TihOwYfi3TmeLdXTk1S/g+glPUkmo2JLbzTWp032DpssapLg==
Received: from sk-desktop.localnet (static-72-81-252-22.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.22]) by interserver.kitterman.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18CCF801DD for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jun 2020 17:42:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2020 17:42:37 -0400
Message-ID: <3138524.EPDo7oxCqE@sk-desktop>
In-Reply-To: <25420528-d356-0273-ceb3-c44a3c94bc91@gmail.com>
References: <DM5PR0601MB367115AD49513EAF3953716CF68B0@DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <11640715.3lbasgNmsr@sk-desktop> <25420528-d356-0273-ceb3-c44a3c94bc91@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/MQ4cAD0ip8wJaIZqaw2k5rKCCcE>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields
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, 06 Jun 2020 21:42:40 -0000

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 5:26:08 PM EDT Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 6/6/2020 2:23 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > If things like DMARC, SPF, and DKIM do nothing more than get abusers to
> > use
> > different domains than they would otherwise, I think that's a win.
> 
> The issue here is DMARC, not SPF or DKIM, since DMARC is the only one of
> the 3 that restricts the choice of domain name.
> 
> With that in mind, I'll ask you why you think the kind of change you
> cite is a win.

1.  I think the domain displayed to the end user matters.  In my sample size 
of 1, it matters to me.  I know I'm not the average user, but independent of 
the question of how many users it matters to, there are some.

2.  When abusers use different domains to send mail, it adds more information 
for filters to work on, so even if this is all about filtering, that works 
better too.

Scott K