Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing the From address?
Joseph Brennan <brennan@columbia.edu> Tue, 21 July 2020 19:09 UTC
Return-Path: <jb51@columbia.edu>
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 A270C3A07F0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:09:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Jx0ajDmPpx3A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00364e01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00364e01.pphosted.com [148.163.139.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE753A07F2 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0167074.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00364e01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06LJ0j0g001086 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:09:01 -0400
Received: from sendprodmail11.cc.columbia.edu (sendprodmail11.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.72.19]) by mx0b-00364e01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32bt4epehc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:09:00 -0400
Received: from mail-io1-f69.google.com (mail-io1-f69.google.com [209.85.166.69]) by sendprodmail11.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06LJ8x6F010140 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:09:00 -0400
Received: by mail-io1-f69.google.com with SMTP id k10so14043992ioh.22 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
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=c6QTbE2R5wajgOTvIpxx5/9qLq6wQESZHYQDc++/OcE=; b=onUD6AnnN0Jnd949LNl3Rjblc7bBweBOUjUAQSmqlKENZyRigmxjvffbNAFFQ7lZ0i hd83+715+ATNU1++ZHMSzCBfNsLvEKdWHGQCrk0lPqdwAuavxc8L3GHuxueDIjistqu4 Zd7iHh8U5jfhXZESSgm19p2oHG1S0d6nS2I126gLc4XwtGAW5gK+uJTaCWsmky3nukdn Bs5NbcwCvlxGF1rHnv2OtVQwOOmMY431PziCS/PUPDauKwyerb8/ChwWFYA6S3SbmfmI 5J3kBWogWO+CTYkLZtqyLaZrGoF4J9wtMln/Z6WBvc+USmjLwBHEDvXRTDgafZsYIEDH LqXg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531DwREhPL4uIMrhHyCMkHHoIZFf8n3/1ungSAHKM0PhB6ZLEKLM 3Hf7wBNbTvT/tSTgDfxWqWRh0EfZYFIu6aRiAHkhuaHcdK7kDN0Inp6xIAu2Prx544XRNurYMMS kfTRr5Dzeh83FqfrFWcUqcY2h4OaFpQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:11cb:: with SMTP id g11mr32528960jas.14.1595358539483; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxocVI2FaEOUIbPvhLMpnaI7fOIIVY2GkDwTbf9Z3R+MFc5tT4EY5WlrP1JyrqjO7wyqekwiF0sPpmsyk8AxIk=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:11cb:: with SMTP id g11mr32528933jas.14.1595358539070; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cd9258e6-3917-2380-dd9b-66d74f3a64d3@gmail.com> <20200717210053.674D61D2C431@ary.qy> <CAL0qLwbkhG-qUyGqxaEjcFn2Lb7wPMhcPFEMA8eqptBJpePPxA@mail.gmail.com> <8efcf71c-f841-46a4-10b7-feb41a741405@gmail.com> <CAL0qLwbK7GQXkiS+H8GtsvHMzWr4o431Shc7Cc9MhqsTiHfzFw@mail.gmail.com> <bc7ed18c-8f1d-b41b-0a4b-3aa180a63563@gmail.com> <CAL0qLwYgs7py1aTQ87pykNT_0dpnrKz=+1DxMMSQMgbwz4XZDg@mail.gmail.com> <5AF00366-DB28-41CB-A1C4-F5BCA77EC969@wordtothewise.com> <CAL0qLwZRYb4yk_WJKizR0UA97XK3VedfZw73YgyTPHuOpxZQhQ@mail.gmail.com> <74a6fb5f7578452f9080cddb8ebbc8f5@bayviewphysicians.com> <CABa8R6uLz6_rcGRXzoVM934HYAzNCdAG8txxkhBmYLPM25dffg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABa8R6uLz6_rcGRXzoVM934HYAzNCdAG8txxkhBmYLPM25dffg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joseph Brennan <brennan@columbia.edu>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:08:48 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMSGcLBRPVHjkhfzkTpGZFKgEP1je5spn2TdKPg2f7PLdmwp+Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-CU-OB: Yes
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-21_14:2020-07-21, 2020-07-21 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/PUxpZI9SFGPiS1rDAKmrb5giUrs>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing the From address?
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, 21 Jul 2020 19:09:04 -0000
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 1:28 PM Brandon Long <blong=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Do sms/mms programs show the phone number any more? I think there's been a deliberate strategy to make email clients more like > other messaging clients, and the technical parts like the actual address are details that most of the time aren't useful to the user... when > they're not being spoofed, of course, or otherwise need to differentiate between multiple addresses for the same person. > - I think you're right about how non-email messaging clients have influenced email. But even in email, Microsoft's Outlook, with its roots as an intraoffice memo client, has shown only display name as far back as I know, except when Internet mail comes in with a From header that has no display name to show. For all its quirks, Outlook is the only client I can think of that shows the content of the RFC5322 Sender header, even if it is in the peculiar "x on behalf of y" notation, which shows display name when there is one and address otherwise. But we are digressing into a proposal for an Internet Email Client standard. Joseph Brennan Lead, Email and Systems Applications
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-crocker… Kurt Andersen (IETF)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker on behalf of Kurt Andersen
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] no from addresses nowhere, Respo… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Benny Lyne Amorsen
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Benny Lyne Amorsen
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Brandon Long
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Doug Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dotzero
- [dmarc-ietf] DMARC marketing Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Benny Pedersen
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Joseph Brennan
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Why are MUAs hiding or removing … Benny Pedersen
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jim Fenton
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Douglas E. Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC marketing Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-cro… Dave Crocker