Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #42 - Expand DMARC reporting URI functionality

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 08 December 2020 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 926903A0FEC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 07:54:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, 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=iecc.com header.b=bldSSCnp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=FwJjQF9u
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 WvVQoQ0MozNG for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 07:54:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 5E6983A0FED for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 07:54:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 71246 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2020 15:54:29 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=1164a.5fcfa1b5.k2012; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=C/Eq6qpg7ZZwF2JrYN90z11d6wW2L3qa7QzL09GQa4I=; b=bldSSCnpriryIr7w6gmNfOoZI2vFZ/Pkerg7y8GW46eAOfOK6lXeqkwFHaNXJKrGWhgaSvfyrIkd4HjM7U7Ycvfkw8vcoDWMzWLd4pk40G9Hc0CHjhbRov3S3CbMPKPxggw0IkU25Sern9uW2/8ROuRXac3zDYFbLA2nMgE6v8oaal3UqN5rc9esLJNyPfbvkGlQoS0KYrhIq9IBsbiODd8Vc2GUQDTyz+Uufz4okLOYWDrQxpX+bt0Wgh8PQ5B7iTE+hgrUbewX8KHqOkrjDKwjlSIENr/kIQLRMea8utvPFQN601ExO+qYO4Surg3vxzoOhy/DY3mAVwbhRXXa+Q==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type; s=1164a.5fcfa1b5.k2012; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=C/Eq6qpg7ZZwF2JrYN90z11d6wW2L3qa7QzL09GQa4I=; b=FwJjQF9uMSS781vbv3ALVYwuhDJP1+PQ/e4co2sBLsAlPnSaKt+FtZ636FzhCyOtZDf/G9bl/Svo8/HFgmjhQ5rPo94Ggt8+4Yia32OY6YKID0MiQtGjKc8oEJPzorQPY07HuX9Ib6m4TltSN9eGv1L9HZpBLdUh/0BRuXHsFKEyNvHyfpVvz8+giSJ3szGMuL3u7w5LIEunRLtLJ27IBapXjiDarKjcgXR+mkueT0/eRFXOEbzLJssw6KWoIebfvW7lM3BQI+Q1XhF7s1dK638ryJRJuTMDSi1e0UxqrxS8q1k+BJu24EV5wc+VPQmySJg7iMk4S4irxqibr1CpMg==
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 08 Dec 2020 15:54:29 -0000
Date: 8 Dec 2020 10:54:28 -0500
Message-ID: <cde83285-5cf1-41f0-6df2-b89637cfc7cb@taugh.com>
From: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Dotzero" <dotzero@gmail.com>
Cc: "IETF DMARC WG" <dmarc@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XoYcphtwr1h2GdTArS8+8KvSOj0fOdKLgrwipDVEYE0CC=Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <bf90e25d-b0de-5f41-095-e7a4c9a7c9cd@taugh.com> <20201207214133.2D5142922931@ary.qy> <CAJ4XoYcphtwr1h2GdTArS8+8KvSOj0fOdKLgrwipDVEYE0CC=Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/dPMCl23DCqH8IDVPEBmkfyjSn4k>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #42 - Expand DMARC reporting URI functionality
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, 08 Dec 2020 15:54:34 -0000

>> I didn't get any of those (the POSTs below are not to the right URI)
>> but it's impressive how fast Russian bots started to probe it, within
>> hours.
>
> I thought it's about interoperability. Simply having a webserver running
> doesn't come close to interoperability, and certainly not at scale.

I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I know there's no http reporting in DMARC, 
but there was in an early version of the spec.  I was wondering if anyone 
had implemented that.  Apparently not.


> My question was not intended to imply that HTTPS reporting should be
> avoided. My point was that there has been basically no security discussion
> or scrutiny of such an implementation.

That's fine but as I said I think it is clear that the security of https 
reporting is better than of mail reporting.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly