IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC result for DKIM testing and policy

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 21 March 2024 18:39 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 854A9C151066 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.858
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.858 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=0.249, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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="tZXwAZsO"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="h+j5zDzq"
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 VfrLFDHRikFU for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:39:40 -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 74CABC14F702 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 54615 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2024 18:39:37 -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=d55565fc7ee9.k2403; bh=3Ks/sAqxIHBnzudl0M8C51PGPA7t8j3kbNx7ZcFm0Zo=; b=tZXwAZsORBIPTAMrL/FCW5HWhSVEiN+ui56Dd9IqOK0OtQSVhg2s4+MVVWw2EuTEiS8CoRAfOuAvlsagEGVPl4OUYN848edV1c80+pNn5+e/5MQSY25TIjuoHPIOWLKK/7RYIZ1TWrSrrhCrxX6CO0eTvRVdbcYzZmzmnl/B31ay3axRCAZ1h1PhoIgS8pcaPCNBTbq32rdFy6bKIdbh1IXKtlGZkDV3WUDPnqey0OGuq3OdLHNRSNJjNVVG+9fATytw1BrgQKZCIGAn85IyEINdVP1lkoOMR0OgrNHpviB+toZpJfDyD4LX4p1mpiCrZSxFIxL4Gu8ZC2+XUWtz2w==
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=d55565fc7ee9.k2403; bh=3Ks/sAqxIHBnzudl0M8C51PGPA7t8j3kbNx7ZcFm0Zo=; b=h+j5zDzq0fZFaO4c3g2VJv6XF51LjRny4NrHi773g5LL4LecpQFjjLr3wvOtXjABaH9tBPbLp/349oNomJr0EDx4fogabR2ym3Ld2587Zv/3xpQH4605oOdOITKR3PsMxU0Q/Qf0efdWPD998bmK8nFNKDC12Ih5K6WLjLC0+DVknUkP1LGtPmoFlmln5JaY0ImJtn2YwLqed8zE1d9AMUSA7IoKxHCa3lpAYstNkL+CUP6uScST98MsUyaKYHByoCbFbE37QeP5ULnw/6aBk3rPkSFi+J5Mtij3crO/t2e6BMiB3fndDG5ix3qsxw2RuZkcwAl7X+ZiWr0EZizovQ==
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 CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD) via TCP6; 21 Mar 2024 18:39:36 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 33F1B85DC66E; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:39:35 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:39:35 -0400
Message-Id: <20240321183936.33F1B85DC66E@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: todd.herr@valimail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAHej_8xNo26cdBJKAonxdAiEYqPyESBywxqWGfGrx8nxxgkSRw@mail.gmail.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/j8a4Eu0syPnwLqN9BlMQo_Yd7Rk>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC result for DKIM testing and policy
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: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 18:39:45 -0000

It appears that Todd Herr  <todd.herr@valimail.com> said:
>   2. That part of 6376 might be better written as "Should the signature
>   fail to verify, verifiers MUST NOT treat messages from Signers in testing
>   mode differently from unsigned email." as I see no reason to penalize a
>   Domain Owner who successfully DKIM signs messages, even in testing mode.
>   But I could very well be in the weeds here...

But 6376 already says in section 6.1.:

   Therefore, a Verifier SHOULD NOT treat a message that has one or more
   bad signatures and no good signatures differently from a message with
   no signature at all.

Once again I do not think we have anything to say here, so we should not say it.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email