IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] [ietf-dkim] a slightly less kludge alternative to draft-kucherawy-dmarc-rcpts

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Thu, 17 November 2016 14:30 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.net>
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 1B0BB129972 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:30:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isdg.net header.b=sMc8I2uH; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=beta.winserver.com header.b=eV18YVvR
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 r6trQOhJPi0c for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:30:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ntbbs.santronics.com (winserver.com [76.245.57.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B70E1297ED for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:30:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=912; t=1479393019; atps=ietf.org; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From: Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=f3WjISZXtSAIaKayOiDoLbKoLTE=; b=sMc8I2uHh+znVqb8pnnDYbF/ohvYNXi+GRrBWAadWUc55ICW8s36kTaQqw2cUb DPcbK9ojjjggeOwQVgvS1oM4JJ93Wk4u1HwZt5COxbv2Qt4PAMpKDou/wZ4RB5bm luBOZ8HExXGEHYBsMNzv0nSMxJvA5X9t9G99RCVTgF0bE=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.5) for dmarc@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:30:19 -0500
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=pass policy=all author.d=isdg.net asl.d=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([76.245.57.74]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.5) with ESMTP id 931979628.1.2760; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:30:18 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=912; t=1479392979; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=qDk79vm v0rkEeqxIhztQ3z0NYUr6Xcacr3ojjXDLXnk=; b=eV18YVvRY4C8fc/NakPeUWp 1t3EntyapZMrQN5xD50ZQ/WVi29dflYCmuiDGASFET8f3uYnP/JfivJ9j6QEZk+K TJKxeCtCrSNrtHHG5FyDmvPDC5TdN7j+mxsAD//cMtWzfO3Neq8wmiCI8r6ihRir NZm5pAXVg4IqDzLBoktI=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.5) for dmarc@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:29:39 -0500
Received: from [192.168.1.68] ([99.121.5.8]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.5) with ESMTP id 928443968.10.213028; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:29:39 -0500
Message-ID: <582DBEF5.5010101@isdg.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:30:13 -0500
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>, Ietf Dkim <ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1611142158000.21738@ary.local> <01Q7ASDZFS6C011WUX@mauve.mrochek.com> <CAL0qLwazAg2UJvGAr+nx8R_xEbc4xV0ttPEWFKUD69u6xXaMhA@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwaMzy=qeW5XYZ_txPaiYE27Oof+C5V1uRANvv-_cayOcQ@mail.gmail.com> <CY1PR00MB0107389F8FE73F140849A19996BE0@CY1PR00MB0107.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <2736ea21-69e6-83b1-3b59-377c032290b5@dcrocker.net> <CY1PR00MB01072F4EB32969888104C45196BE0@CY1PR00MB0107.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <CAL0qLwbdNVwT-xiCmxyhSqKcp4-hCA1COHKh0wdYrYEekzZ=XA@mail.gmail.com> <3009defcc6dc9043823618dbc338460d@xmail.mwn.de> <CY1PR00MB0107C2A78F65F65ED68920A796BE0@CY1PR00MB0107.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY1PR00MB0107C2A78F65F65ED68920A796BE0@CY1PR00MB0107.namprd00.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/_aQcZo9r4gqRG8KUdGVIaHJKW9A>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [ietf-dkim] a slightly less kludge alternative to draft-kucherawy-dmarc-rcpts
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:30:25 -0000

On 11/16/2016 1:09 PM, Terry Zink wrote:
>> This means ARC will be needed not only for mailing lists which modify the header or
>> body of an email, but for EVERY mailing list and EVERY forwarded email or EVERYTIME
>> the recipient has been modified and the email leaves the ADMD boundary. From a
>> DMARC point of view DKIM will not be needed anymore because it has now the same
>> function as SPF - verifiying the origin of direct emails - and SPF is easier to implement
>> for most administrators.
>
> +1.
>
> It basically (almost) turns DKIM into SPF. That's not that appealing a solution.

For exclusive policies (SPF -ALL), you really don't need DKIM, DMARC 
or ARC for that matter since the receiver (at least ours) will never 
accept the payload anyway, i.e. it never gets to the SMTP "DATA" 
state.  SPF does not require you to accept the mail for the hard 
reject policy (-ALL).

-- 
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email