[dmarc-ietf] p=reject
Michael Davis <mikedup84@gmail.com> Mon, 18 March 2019 19:48 UTC
Return-Path: <mikedup84@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 8B4C413121A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 LHoIviumgI4M for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2d]) (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 4EEF913119D for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com with SMTP id g127so3185909vsd.6 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=GAg3NFJuiJ7TpAYWGNZEL2iETq/tQI3H9h7mhMUgIpM=; b=T0LwJrqQz3LCDUGR8bSGl7htUqHil4QQWmRTVQlNFag1QSZYWiecG3KpAiaNkxlCIu tmRS2BSNS+QlB9GFoDwN3nWuhU/H8ipFZWxg1hg2bVzo0zZqMaGchSLCvLbBembgzkhP NoxfiqiNWjYd7ziJngxHxQ1v0+4MYPxL17zQ497iuCSodeb/eKojbpflXmLEqZAfNnJy SenSRuU4XqRzW38iyLxqbg6GRT9bN1PFM9zmHnqscR70Q4HUswq/hsWH9/xhyeB8MVya QrOUNxdPc9aAG+M5BkTdHryZTETPduaii0wOCws1DP9Ke80y6+nUkNfVnOGpwv09r4qJ 0frg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=GAg3NFJuiJ7TpAYWGNZEL2iETq/tQI3H9h7mhMUgIpM=; b=mvVrDyCeGtcLUuGPeXpnH7E52Gtv8/b12UPlVyovYY7r1t3z931aAnReMAMyoZUqae urT2xbYK+jPl6ckn7lte0x03JMUM6t2kmCMujQ9Xibbv36BPLGXV9Wix0ZKJraimX7Co UD1VKs99Zl5iw6dLdd6FKxE3OizdFPmAmdACnu2jwiZO5m1vvY9HeSnlMBYEOy97vdTf b/xHpd/OAmHsQGUIqFGr7t/5ggQJNqRBl3P/Go3X9FTpXBUSXtWox5AS1f6UNebfGwC1 44954ctWQyUETWY6Vw2okaqWHIt4+xiwgI9E/cI+pfJf3Xaotsee6roo3QKhsx4oCWge QttA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXn/HwAmYN98dhhR6zv4F4DCTfYGXdBOA4Fnff7n3wZQvpf5cM2 TDOGyStMBheRlDCg28KAba9Ku1051Fsy0BLoIAtRznQz
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqydEk4l0nrM9wGVk+x2B+pow7PlGYdDzOXHNihtmh74K1UzDqH9mHPC+xuRG3CZLumjMVAsYEwwekGQECmUiss=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:7684:: with SMTP id r126mr9673509vsc.219.1552938537027; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:48:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Michael Davis <mikedup84@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 14:48:41 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOXFXsuLdsZgA-uJEDApRgW6bmzx5cORbiy=2KM9tNxHjqBxNA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000db96d5058463adbd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/ZsJ5cRdftf3E-9yEN8PxR8w5zFA>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] p=reject
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, 18 Mar 2019 19:58:08 -0000
If a sender's IP is in SPF, so SPF passes; and the applied DKIM signature is successfully decrypted, so DKIM passes; what good is checking alignment and rejecting a message? I have had Adobe and Cloudflare automated system emails rejected based on those senders' DMARC policy, after SPF and DKIM pass. These emails were regarding password resets and come from servers that do not equal the spoofed address domain. It would seem that if the sender is approved according to SPF and verified according to DKIM that alignment being a reason for rejection post authenticas is an exercise of absurdity. Please help me understand otherwise.
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=reject Hector Santos
- [dmarc-ietf] p=reject Michael Davis
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=reject Autumn Tyr-Salvia
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] p=reject John Levine