[dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields

Jesse Thompson <jesse.thompson@wisc.edu> Tue, 02 June 2020 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <jesse.thompson@wisc.edu>
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 483CE3A0CA0 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 09:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
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 (1024-bit key) header.d=wisc.edu
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 FZ7iA6tJgLCs for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 09:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmauth2.doit.wisc.edu (wmauth2.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.197.222]) (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 49D403A0C99 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 09:44:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn7nam10lp2102.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.70.102]) by smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.4.20190812 64bit (built Aug 12 2019)) with ESMTPS id <0QBB00DCZ566N5A0@smtpauth2.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for dmarc@ietf.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:44:30 -0500 (CDT)
X-Wisc-Env-From-B64: amVzc2UudGhvbXBzb25Ad2lzYy5lZHU=
X-Spam-PmxInfo: Server=avs-2, Version=6.4.7.2805085, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2020.6.2.163616, AntiVirus-Engine: 5.74.0, AntiVirus-Data: 2020.5.19.5740000, SenderIP=[104.47.70.102]
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Gs611JAcFb+uGTc/oMzpF+tzbE7xqXQ6hOsB7bIiL8mtXVsf2xpceyTUbKOjNiVwFy4pZk/Ar3XM7/7aIxV+YYCuz7YMp/5O28p4lCTaMoRk99P23jzfy2EVOpweFqRWqXhliVVcfFAE/RTT9d2xFEHmLhgEHzMNnB4bYdAC6L5lqZ6JSwEpCDa+VtF+4rdim3kY5Tv/aG9v0tcrSau3Wgss6vtobLQ48UkS7hB1eMlLTn3XvPTdS9MvPYIfOg9GAgofKmbXpQCTqg1KZ9QUiBTOy4SL5MRIJCGPVGsD4v35tV3AOaq3SAhHkvV4+d4WGmGtdCR3Y6b818saymimSg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=uP1AFNKpbRwHu1Zx6sh8VQzGvkjSadqAr3A/O7sZhrw=; b=OXTrG3aeyzN8xpYcrueNDkbSQ4CyVyhgzdJbtBzDbi1FtZXx81/lU3YvtyyK5Ds7yR27L3yIBOIg/DlD6OwrVXcSlFrSSVnuDZDLp8iKHcTuuKcbYgcSBAKceG8UZa36eFe2yIGrkHThJ+LmEJzwu6S7wBZjdIErbY97vjEE4C3FlfTuxi7Ky2rlyCj3yCRJUoRKik5YMPZvBLqnZdQH73feme5v4empFGEj/42d5X/dEWXC4zBf573ydR7l0OyL7XMOIU1ATT0GHj6sekWngzfL25bZ6byKXdQBN+MSgHThDqE5JKzeSfTx70sqhOoZTACMCf3rWp7SzukB2xdldQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wisc.edu; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=wisc.edu; dkim=pass header.d=wisc.edu; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wisc.edu; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=uP1AFNKpbRwHu1Zx6sh8VQzGvkjSadqAr3A/O7sZhrw=; b=TTwkhWNVfz/8s/WnEmc+5aOg5uNSzqFt/OabZs0V8MCPrnqS1eJ2iA9nGQLy6/eRrxtjJmm2DzXaUwukfB9gK2Bk2iH8ytoPV/wPA/32PjbfUaayvSNRHHfWZeHnbGqg9c4KPYRaGaBhrP4vjilPxo6RUj7fFScMjGNRQiKw6l4=
Received: from DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:7b::16) by DM5PR0601MB3718.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:4:77::38) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3045.25; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 16:44:29 +0000
Received: from DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::85c:984b:d5ea:b2a4]) by DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::85c:984b:d5ea:b2a4%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3066.018; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 16:44:29 +0000
From: Jesse Thompson <jesse.thompson@wisc.edu>
To: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
Thread-topic: DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields
Thread-index: AQHWOPpmfzKSzdFoG0WHtc/gNTjvSg==
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 16:44:28 +0000
Message-id: <DM5PR0601MB367115AD49513EAF3953716CF68B0@DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, es-MX, en-GB
Content-language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-Originating-IP: [47.12.96.133]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e9a34a5f-3064-44d0-05a2-08d8071437d9
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR0601MB3718:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR0601MB37186C4FEE2F0EC831658A2FF68B0@DM5PR0601MB3718.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:4714;
x-forefront-prvs: 0422860ED4
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: MIjjLnaFepExU+5kcywAIrbNxj1LybInM9ysRwsbXYjBEuusamtI4X2m1y2wMLfriJ+hvHP0y9wAhkfJsQQNyxjMOYiNwvN1F8fHVDhKQIgjeZwSfoFAGwX7bfVTIwgk56islqNv4GuLU8bJznXt9XWiOQCIjIBBqmAznKx93JA3gwMp8VfcBoDSyDGvLygkw0Lt7HD97KOjsRoW7+ZocBVTl45BFbFZwcHEDvJyNAI173fO0kwzT1SSSk0GuILG/zaDVzmyN7y85Ss3xlGo1SO80zA9br5F6+lsoU6O7n7AyyHyHzZCYXJrss5+Zyfp
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DM5PR0601MB3671.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(55016002)(66446008)(66556008)(76116006)(8936002)(8676002)(66946007)(66476007)(33656002)(52536014)(786003)(5660300002)(64756008)(9686003)(316002)(478600001)(44832011)(75432002)(66574014)(71200400001)(6506007)(83380400001)(7696005)(86362001)(186003)(2906002)(6916009)(26005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: nhNZz0+vYLXScOuGHO5rOaGB4hJhz+iW8SiqzZWxX0mqYCA7+5VTVMbolOL/RjVpYS6TvJ19/RjrVRYxs7zgvnQ6aGWamEEYXrBwkcCm6tIKMH0cLKEIXtFSCAjeyC9AUZODvo5Hy3nFbdNMjKIxxVUNSv2Ffq7ZnkKHKGsmq55fhqfc5XnMay+HWS8VgEKNrunS13k6V1mQN2dd+sTyWVvz7oE6O+UgWajDneT9N5OhCiN0il3NoYQybcORypTYN0p7u9vpKmGt+DJ6vWXHvfJWFqPAnKh6Afgs63BOWp1Sf/tTVPtYw1L6/Mi7XDdUFasddCHriuGkiGM7081uL9B8cog8gbTNFcPnj0s8EGIs96yifksb5EfO00seZc/5ktDVYrBbKIE108rnzIfmqfSBFypm+UhiJ9K/A9CNkXx0TI0YVRQpONzVMSHBE5KFvRAQxaUeeySpeIS9wD4FW2vmh/X7q1b5hMBPJ8g7HFE=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: wisc.edu
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e9a34a5f-3064-44d0-05a2-08d8071437d9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jun 2020 16:44:28.9815 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2ca68321-0eda-4908-88b2-424a8cb4b0f9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: bKORspFrZ3VxrZ/UpoEOULwzLkVr9DAQlDqfVoOHv1c8Zgc8IFaDYXKUn4GlFXK9MJoMhBfClm15bfPMNb63kA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR0601MB3718
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/b7C1ojnS4_cbfcme9_2L1tU-GdQ>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC alignment conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields
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, 02 Jun 2020 16:44:34 -0000

I'm relaying these DMARC questions/concerns on behalf of an email admin at another university.  I quickly searched this list's archives for the Sender header vs DMARC alignment issue and don't see much aside from a conversation in May 2015.  Is it worth further discussion and/or an issue in Trac?  I think I know the answer to the second concern, but I'll defer to people more adept at explaining the nuance.

See below...

Thanks,
Jesse Thompson
UW-Madison

"
I don't see on the list of issues the most fundamental problem of DMARC, namely that it conflicts with RFC 5322 on the use of the From and Sender header fields [1] and possibly with RFC 6326 as to the significance of DKIM fail [2].  The former is the more serious problem. Making DMARC alignment part of a standard for Internet messages requires a revision of RFC 5322. I'd love to see this resolved.

[1]
The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message,
   that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible
   for the writing of the message.  The "Sender:" field specifies the
   mailbox of the agent responsible for the actual transmission of the
   message.

[2]
signature verification failure does not force rejection of the message;
"