[dmarc-ietf] Policy Override in aggregate-reporting

Matthäus Wander <mail@wander.science> Fri, 22 March 2024 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mail@wander.science>
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 75C98C14F71D for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 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_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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=wander.science header.b="Sj9WYZ/S"; dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=wander.science header.b="rybt/pjR"
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 MLgZmzkn8yc7 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.swznet.de (cathay.swznet.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:13b:2048::113]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCB0AC14F703 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wander.science; s=2023-05-rsa; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:To:From:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Cc:References: Sender:Reply-To; bh=kTJ+9E5aiFhgT+Gv8yqOO5dxwLKXiaUctoz7fmdQpHY=; b=Sj9WYZ/Sl 9upSx8mUwXQ/xrC0U1RkjBkzoqaaJ2VpjO12fcaZTFVV8jlMt6DtKnwrew+ceaAVPNDtxIWu1wAU2 NHXrCjTstLfkvbrJrkiQg89pS3hLhhyJ2s2X1o7a4WAegH/80g7lTOb2gVY/6122FldJNID7FU6lJ h16xpoPe+YZ/C0V5vN3h/hPaipkgTqSCL4BD7SXyXlgwvGL36A1NbaCmScVujxfTQRBsEIGhKNIWN q0Xv2gxjShXrmFClftLlkcjCP0vKxthZCSk/8zfqwm0ZjshDzjyiinJtGIFsZk3xeRq7uOmRank8w IMAwBBuVZnJ8mRIuhs4PmjpIQ==;
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wander.science; s=2023-05-ed25519; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:To:From:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Cc:References: Sender:Reply-To; bh=kTJ+9E5aiFhgT+Gv8yqOO5dxwLKXiaUctoz7fmdQpHY=; b=rybt/pjRx jAxPe96yB74+a0CLg+NKETAqOJFUoNzH0BdozzTFU8rhyyTiDXxdXQp4zK00awfKsyniWOm7CxODg ==;
Received: from dynamic-2a01-0c23-759a-e200-5d6c-d74f-0d21-a974.c23.pool.telefonica.de ([2a01:c23:759a:e200:5d6c:d74f:d21:a974]) by mail.swznet.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mail@wander.science>) id 1rnnIp-0003o3-OU for dmarc@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 23:23:56 +0100
Message-ID: <7f3223b2-6547-438b-a90a-2969ab34f7d6@wander.science>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 23:23:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
From: Matthäus Wander <mail@wander.science>
Autocrypt: addr=mail@wander.science; keydata= xjMEX32k2xYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAnfSBcaYKuP99+S+Cv7yM2MC5uDVgjDHq72XoUkvDduTN Jk1hdHRow6R1cyBXYW5kZXIgPG1haWxAd2FuZGVyLnNjaWVuY2U+wpYEExYIAD4WIQRN5cud QSNuO9g4P/vwPFqQ1RKslAUCX32k2wIbAwUJCWYBgAULCQgHAgYVCgkICwIEFgIDAQIeAQIX gAAKCRDwPFqQ1RKslBHNAP92aGE3RVTUoVtAOMVyEzC5kpipuYgwEUBGohcKJ6FlkwEAyvGn 2Cqw6T/GOCgcZb3NlOLAAh83v3GOLnbiQxzZgQ3OOARffaTbEgorBgEEAZdVAQUBAQdAMtpC ADRykYF4hU5t/d1ItWsCVcQTrUXARpFGk4s8shADAQgHwn4EGBYIACYWIQRN5cudQSNuO9g4 P/vwPFqQ1RKslAUCX32k2wIbDAUJCWYBgAAKCRDwPFqQ1RKslI9HAP908/+/2MpEH/63y93a 1WB5pcYFy9Do/b0AQjjkfP+ZVQD9EaC+bOBrNgJzHFwhJAHI0l2KD79pMSgXSllPlA0dBQg=
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a01:c23:759a:e200:5d6c:d74f:d21:a974
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mail@wander.science
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 13 Feb 2021 17:57:42 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.swznet.de)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/kBkCL9Fiv0f0vSPgTiA5ogzaJfQ>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Policy Override in aggregate-reporting
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: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:24:03 -0000

RFC7489 contains a description of the possible PolicyOverrideType 
values: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7489#page-72>

While aggregate-reporting-14 uses the same set of values, the 
description is missing. I suggest to add it back as a new section into 
the main body. "sampled_out" needs an update due to the replacement of 
the "pct" tag. Text suggestion follows.

OLD 2.1.1
There MAY be an element for reason, meant to include any notes the 
reporter might want to include as to why the disposition policy does not 
match the policy_published, such as a Local Policy override (possible 
values listed in Appendix A).

CHANGED 2.1.1
There MAY be an element for reason, meant to include any notes the 
reporter might want to include as to why the disposition policy does not 
match the policy_published, such as a Local Policy override (see Section 
2.1.5).

NEW 2.1.5 Policy Override Reason

The reason element, indicating an override of the DMARC policy, consists 
of a mandatory type field and an optional comment field. The type field 
MUST have one of the pre-defined values listed below. The comment field 
is an unbounded string for providing further details.

Possible values for the policy override type:

    forwarded:  The message was relayed via a known forwarder, or local
       heuristics identified the message as likely having been forwarded.
       There is no expectation that authentication would pass.

    local_policy:  The Mail Receiver's local policy exempted the message
       from being subjected to the Domain Owner's requested policy
       action.

    mailing_list:  Local heuristics determined that the message arrived
       via a mailing list, and thus authentication of the original
       message was not expected to succeed.

    other:  Some policy exception not covered by the other entries in
       this list occurred.  Additional detail can be found in the
       PolicyOverrideReason's "comment" field.

    sampled_out:  The message was exempted from application of policy by
       the testing mode ("t" tag) in the DMARC policy record.

    trusted_forwarder:  Message authentication failure was anticipated by
       other evidence linking the message to a locally maintained list of
       known and trusted forwarders.

Regards,
Matt