Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not?
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 19 April 2023 16:24 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 C48D5C1516EA for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 09:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.848 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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="NcdSbwoj"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="xt5PQ7bx"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QnGJlifLj8Li for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 09:24:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F33ABC14CE4F for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 09:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 99831 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2023 16:24:19 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=185f5.644015b3.k2304; bh=r4kUJbp8Cx62h88wmMG1iwh9UXgXF+v7kxJmsT4SLZo=; b=NcdSbwojFkySHbuAXGNtkauWMKa6JwHO3QIFlTY+v4X4gJagfu0KMxlmGHWH6n8Dy4N5DUo1qxaKaVTRqwdldeAJQtp0dSoEhsT9WISiAhqd7oORVCzuBtnpkFmcswcpiiyzjtlDbjzzlp5lOLIqchbXSM1nBwK3uxr5dNS+40xiYiErm9nNhzoF+V9cuQWbEVyRPsQBGlxH/oKKcHJ4lI58+6vlkq+sFg7rpxKduvzo8NGNplRdPaiiXDRhlRqdzwvGmLh/uheSoZw4EMf2OUgd27Hg+QMPpbJtdRi6U45Rd21c0rjo2TChG+Mt1epO7ko/nMxJocNFIcNEjboYHQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=185f5.644015b3.k2304; bh=r4kUJbp8Cx62h88wmMG1iwh9UXgXF+v7kxJmsT4SLZo=; b=xt5PQ7bxMzlH8n2drS03PioiB2ZazFuNzn6ojAQMdmP6PPvK3OlixRjWNZL2/vTZVRyU1rZzWxWidGCHJnsad7K5ieeyjdvNux5czZ7X7ZxozIn24n0/SrY3dtXGlKnt81PytcjYInfA1aDdDebR7nhz5kyLUt1hr1czSa0rMIBFro/AHI1l2ACMW7G6TIYHGxVSOfQm/nippDOYgDG5tskgXFVb54YqdB6Ga2w8pNkwYN4r2N76wjZGTBylFkA/KyDgkA8RJbUSzi09Oez2s6pCL7qV5mjAtEyHzeFAHoOTbtxI9tGrOTxtF41yli6NxDkPVRj/teDKQynQcUWrOA==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 19 Apr 2023 16:24:18 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id D11EAC02E870; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 12:24:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 12:24:17 -0400
Message-Id: <20230419162417.D11EAC02E870@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: laura@wordtothewise.com
In-Reply-To: <CF4A2AA2-7EAC-4525-844F-530A12DEC065@wordtothewise.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/dd9rvyd9gti-blOXcidia_7UyIQ>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not?
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 16:24:26 -0000
It appears that Laura Atkins <laura@wordtothewise.com> said: >That was my question: is it an interop issue that ESPs (whether they be your traditional ESP or a SaaS provider that sends >mail on behalf of their customers) cannot support custom domains in the SPF and DKIM and thus cannot support DMARC? Many of >the current companies have made the decision that supporting DMARC is too hard, and so what they do is use their own domain >for DMARC (some publish restrictive polices and some don’t). I don't see how it's an interop problem. They send mail, recipients do the usual DMARC thing with it. The choice of identity may be a business problem between them and their customers, but that's not up to us. I can easily imagine situations where a company figures it's not a particularly attractive phish target, they balance the possible cost of misleading email against the cost of implementing delegated DKIM or subdomains or whatever and decide just go ahead and send. >Should DMARCbis make the recommendation that if you are providing mail services that you SHOULD be able to support corporate >customers using DMARC? It seems to me purely a business decision what domain you use on your mail, so long as it's not one you're not allowed to use. While I agree with you that it is not great that ESPs punt on DMARC, please see once again my note about trying to enumerate all the dumb stuff people might do. R's, John
- [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Douglas Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Laura Atkins
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Jesse Thompson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Douglas Foster
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Dotzero
- [dmarc-ietf] About UAID User Agent Identity. Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperabi… Alessandro Vesely
- [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help … Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to h… Dotzero
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to h… Hector Santos
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to h… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to h… Hector Santos