[dmarc-ietf] Current Status of DMARCBis
Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Wed, 09 August 2023 22:11 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 45154C15106A for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 15:11:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=isdg.net header.b="ZaUk9JqJ"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=beta.winserver.com header.b="U2bBdUUJ"
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 xFDBTyVfCeJv for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 15:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.winserver.com (mail.winserver.com [3.137.120.140]) (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 8BE0FC151085 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 15:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=1196; t=1691619074; atps=ietf.org; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:From:Subject:Message-Id: Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=ljm4MYY0DJAxHHkHOun7Skx5AfBUAIy pXTg+An8FKF0=; b=ZaUk9JqJ+plM5jy2wYNbMEuZV98AaSx3uEabx5IRJzfBDjx Ax7VJwgXIwLbtM7CpdO+garzAUtCTDNHqw1d8s92czz+yd4ZUr1bK3H0goeOiptz WDlWxPrOGlVHWPS2V0Ifp+2BiU0mNc0UqUJtcvNHFwrGTNNCCdPjjH24jIoI=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.13) for dmarc@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 18:11:14 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=none author.d=isdg.net signer.d=beta.winserver.com; dmarc=pass policy=reject author.d=isdg.net signer.d=beta.winserver.com (atps signer);
Received: from beta.winserver.com ([3.132.92.116]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.13) with ESMTP id 3421747084.1.5568; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 18:11:13 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=1196; t=1691619072; h=Received:Received:From: Subject:Message-Id:Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=ljm4MYY0DJAx HHkHOun7Skx5AfBUAIypXTg+An8FKF0=; b=U2bBdUUJZFsnJMsrwUHv2ZKpMd0f CxoaGisqxncm8Ra4Mf69cOiEb6X6fykCJGvytX4FlVHHKLRSljXADN8tFfdkZFsj CkqSzpNXYLBzQ/2uo94ueVIxO/YNYXrmsqQDPXI2YtkaTnG2B/wfNKL9lz2sPiDL qxMZ5phQzrYkBXw=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.12) for dmarc@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 18:11:12 -0400
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([99.122.210.89]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.12) with ESMTP id 3867817803.1.19276; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 18:11:10 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
Message-Id: <5FC39F81-8C11-4768-A184-332A4B3EE842@isdg.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2023 18:10:59 -0400
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.400.51.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/gweozIDmr6bMs4vcleUcDcCSXvY>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Current Status of DMARCBis
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, 09 Aug 2023 22:11:24 -0000
I am interested in understanding what is the current consensus for the key changes in DMARCbis. Anxious to begin exploratory coding, I am personally focused on integration algorithms to apply dynamically processed results for SPF, DMARC,Alignment and the “relaxer” auth= tag. spf=pass spf=hardfail spf=softfail spf=neutral spf=unknown dmarc=Pass dmarc=Reject dmarc=Quarantine dmarc=None alignment=pass alignment=fail auth=spf auth=dkim auth=spf,dkim With no judgement. Of course, the issue has been there are too many false negatives with p=reject and p=quarantine applications. Are we considering results for ARC? I don’t know the ARC state conditions to state here, but I presume it provides a "trusted” or “self-signed” solution to correct broken 1st party signatures? I would also like to see an updated DMARCBis protocol lookup procedure or algorithm when considering the proposed optional process parameter “auth=“ value. An updated draft would be the ideal for the most current consensus. Thanks — HLS
- [dmarc-ietf] Current Status of DMARCBis Hector Santos