Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tickets 98 and 99 -- fake reports are not a problem and if they were authentication would not help

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Mon, 25 January 2021 19:02 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 BFFAD3A1754 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 si6B8xQKHlDK for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com (mail-pg1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) (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 CE3BF3A174E for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id z21so9571805pgj.4 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:06 -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=Pc8PoCil635Y5KRVpMW4K2kAu1KgNjre1DNuDnOF6e4=; b=CDWBpaxWqvngrdmB4xpYCbvJCrPywpuq1lJCHWyUlSP84QgOHWo1T2NuolFUFoIIGg 27RmWzqnJCBvx6bMl3eFp7DNiY8ZVr3GpZp4+1unqB1ebQ4oimT5zq5zxXe0PxhMyUZh EC8yrH3M8cGbMphE6oagcaEOWMaFgkBomvCgOQTAoSM2YORF6nRQf3bcv4/7cUQbYWYS N4RA+y8IACn4qzcMDrmrmvyum4ulFpYkJIML9qcJmUciRf8DEZwTU+3XefgUHtC1AWMj h4nGI9E9l+LTN3jK9qo969JM5AQaLiROo+BZRUOW+gDajaExoOjKeyxRwzyh48j+XBg4 DB4w==
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=Pc8PoCil635Y5KRVpMW4K2kAu1KgNjre1DNuDnOF6e4=; b=cVyezdGs8zVPwMn155/WXHoNdZ2MS5qbOtPF9zdzwWG+QfXVl0PFNQxtpDftzj6c5K AHG3VFhgD+v8abgPwofilh3xdJh1rXa/nqlnDk2UnvbfiTdyInI3zgynCcNHrxJc8ehg fhTNEjUe+Impw7pPHjkAzGM9uLdI4hxkpT6fNFERKuhUftN11rVQenf1hVpTi79BH7Wf SoFxo/tVVf03q3w+JNrgFuk3gjncCSeJfSrDVNMuT57I7Iz/EFHUklyM7ZCElTpKH9wR cDCxh8BxeM90iaqyIZnlG9Dt7poxXULf1JR9uZOFsmCb6K+23p0x8geYlXIROV91C3Pn g9Sw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530y4w1IBzWXAMBRWFUR9wGvAbtMGvsC9aouCIrnmOrWvoqZDw3Q X6mlFYfJNbxFL9ec3zCcxF1Dr/fdbEADlQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyXrz7Fm0n6ms+n2Q/ialCCaIMNT6O5YkhOxGajCGVbLuX5pTESQ2slm5ZW4oEolHKtCtFyzQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:db54:: with SMTP id x20mr1939745pgi.200.1611601325750; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan (107-182-35-22.volcanocom.com. [107.182.35.22]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x19sm863715pff.192.2021.01.25.11.02.04 for <dmarc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:04 -0800 (PST)
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <20210125182350.DE0FE6C131FB@ary.qy> <ddb67702-01e7-783d-9fa6-3e427542092c@mtcc.com> <CAH48ZfwejX1PHO7x1bjJTYyehXZWMuq3jrHFJzAHWfy1jQ+NQg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <26931c0b-9475-ffd5-a996-cc6ffad3a304@mtcc.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:02:03 -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: <CAH48ZfwejX1PHO7x1bjJTYyehXZWMuq3jrHFJzAHWfy1jQ+NQg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/OxIjH2X67sG8J6oiOOVx7jEAYeg>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tickets 98 and 99 -- fake reports are not a problem and if they were authentication would not help
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: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 19:02:08 -0000

On 1/25/21 10:55 AM, Douglas Foster wrote:
> DMARC alignment on the report seems of limited value unless it is 
> aligned to the domain being reported.  But that change would require 
> every unique domain to generate a unique report.   Gsuite and 
> Office365 would probably consider that unacceptable.
>
Google already has my signing keys. This is an implementation detail on 
their part. If they want to host a domain, they should host a domain. 
Laziness is not an excuse for spoofing.

Mike