Re: [dmarc-ietf] Response to a claim in draft-crocker-dmarc-author-00 security considerations

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 7/20/2020 3:05 PM, Jesse Thompson wrote:
> On 7/19/20 1:33 PM,[e-mail]  wrote:
>> The essential point that needs to be made is that standards like this MUST NOT be cast in terms of what end users will do.  In practical terms, this work has nothing to do with end users.  Really.  Nothing.
>>
>> To the extent that anyone wants to make an affirmative claim that end-users/are/  relevant to this work, they need to lay that case out clearly, carefully, and with material that provides objective support.(*)
> I'll take a shot (admittedly, I'm having trouble keeping up with all of the points that have been made):
>
> We're migrating 30,000 lists, of various types/use cases, from a MLM provider that is DMARC-
...
> ** We have had many complaints from users about the From munging **


My wording was not careful enough.  What I /meant/ was: end-users are 
not relevant to the /trust-related decision making/ that is the goal of 
these protection mechanisms.

They certainly /are/ relevant to the sorting/searching/presentation 
issues that are disrupted by having mail authored by the same person 
contain different From: field data.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net