IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Forensic report loops are a problem

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> Mon, 01 February 2021 18:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@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 E89713A113F for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 10:13:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-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 NoDERgWA3tm2 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 10:13:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi1-x233.google.com (mail-oi1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::233]) (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 8377B3A0D74 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 10:13:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi1-x233.google.com with SMTP id d18so19811537oic.3 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:13:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language; bh=30AF6NjwmnsU4Cu+wxRnumT68XXnyhDC5ZTNxWu/wHs=; b=j4xWqvJfC/+xMPZwgInV2Qbh3CiSWYHYoQm9cdC6T3xInr6phN+JPiTKPEOqvV7abT lASp84V5cHtVU9ZPcKkN9ope08ZKtCYIPujBRbgBnZZKbIKbocZArbZ0VD1cZn90TPcO 2o5UWx0OMn8WNz1CdLG1vz5HzShh6d3tTS4CTSMIOELVO8uc+TDaJR7H+05QnoLy/g+4 k51S1eT0+8vOcSAYcjB9+tF+adM/o1F+SM3K6BeJUWXHJ296724hFVWZP0H8533KGY5I N0f79yUkphMys5Aj6S/sG99SnUCNDrvooZao0vOAsi8WC/d40DnXechJ6O1dJ/i7LlGu RZvQ==
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=30AF6NjwmnsU4Cu+wxRnumT68XXnyhDC5ZTNxWu/wHs=; b=JkfEABADlITY0O+5DnpYx8wfCQG4hE9D6FZcO8Dm4ZsEdUHyXTim4zMz/5IrfkiaOY LGsgmrNPsyfHZb6mJBEeT3CQQM0dvCslg4EIj8wrCz+NPDDEuVE1aYwvnfzKbVwz6MJE mzjFG5Gx6jXPz1B7wlBN0mKZQaF4v/2QDY84Zt1x083/5w9qy9hVYjMQ95yMCN4j6A3C tLMVPchaEqitEBv5C1CGF7i4hj+3XgeWhlGmZwyDmJePKfsTeknJqYy4sHrj6Xr7sx4w nzVs3wYBq32LCUWuyVoI4wlv74iJy4zjR6J2P9C9EtAvcvW/i31Pijx7hhNdEDWUgs21 gOEA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Cd5/wNXOCunYvCWtkSMvIv7bbeLMYkh0dYJsFkB2uaRFNttmn A7Mi1DZV0hZqA75qRnDZjJo1RHzWE62Vdw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwe8RW/NatwBIpXMkUSR3dVHZEMt/48002i26rHodVRt75OQYVku7nCHS9w5D++lieu9opqFQ==
X-Received: by 2002:aca:dc56:: with SMTP id t83mr80230oig.75.1612203184504; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:13:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (108-226-162-63.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [108.226.162.63]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a76sm4655086oib.45.2021.02.01.10.13.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:13:03 -0800 (PST)
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>, dmarc@ietf.org
References: <CAL0qLwY5BbwvS9XXqBk=Mp074ntN=NeS97pJAxPBdQEZAsgohg@mail.gmail.com> <20210127203714.007C86CDB9CA@ary.qy> <CAL0qLwbN+HkGfvw79rPPvqL6jWWAsUtWY9X1gW=vAvoeQS8RHg@mail.gmail.com> <b7ea6cb8-ce79-7df7-c521-544358c1866e@crash.com> <dc398e7b-2fc6-f418-4e66-456a6c1189d6@gmail.com> <379e4493-1287-9dd5-5c8f-ae5adf949cbd@tana.it>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9aea1615-64a5-a310-b8c7-83ec0c316dae@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 10:13:02 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <379e4493-1287-9dd5-5c8f-ae5adf949cbd@tana.it>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------152ADBFD33EA181060980680"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/ZZ-VrjsatatI8DUIGoDyAJjWvrs>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Forensic report loops are a problem
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, 01 Feb 2021 18:13:07 -0000

On 2/1/2021 10:08 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Mon 01/Feb/2021 17:38:07 +0100 Dave Crocker wrote:
>> Consider the challenges to ensuring a DMARC pass.  That's a pretty 
>> high barrier to entry against generating reports.
>
> Well, if a mail site is unable to get a DMARC pass, they have more 
> urgent problems to solve than setting up aggregate report generation. 


No, they probably don't have more urgent problems. Sites choose not to 
adopt DMARC for a variety of reasons. It's probably a good idea to 
respect that variety.

The model that a receiving site is not allowed to report DMARC traffic 
unless that site is also generating DMARC authentication is 
Procrustean.  And as I noted, is likely counter-productive.

I understand the zeal that drives a lot of the effort to promote DMARC, 
but the danger with aggressive proselytizing is that it changes from 
serious technical and operational evaluation into purely religious fervor.


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
dcrocker@gmail.com
408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2@redcross.org

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email