IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Coverage

Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com> Sun, 14 April 2019 13:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dotzero@gmail.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 975BC120098 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 FKMFlY4-xwyW for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) (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 7152712007A for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id p10so18243304wrq.1 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a13B9Z9SGHGQ+Xuihcb2R3BTHpcP9YcSFiHTUE0+8G8=; b=ZdOzI07TJmBhtEhOAHUsOzCC7cJhQq9nEx0uU+M4ybqpumzeEWMpKgbmCPB4/sHHrg Hxibb0GzEPU/8eqTIPBe0RrMCs0VQigzRGwaxLxX+uHW8onF4yRTElDcpV9zrqaavrgw 66sXNwLEq8Fp6s747vJ4hWptILTITrL7pnvqZUERBcz/a4H7oKB9XRt3XbsvbyepTRaG jcGaqMzh5zyKKRQXksPoojMQKN+slS72lI/as1LyEJCQIQAkiukhHv2VmdEw5fMOjEDK lrksgbT4PUJHwUfdomS7/C94LYiPS5imwY14MpGKO+QxDhmBRPuML5qH0/STrRHPkYzG S89A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a13B9Z9SGHGQ+Xuihcb2R3BTHpcP9YcSFiHTUE0+8G8=; b=bspTy1HGxip0TiHwFTBdVaCmr7D43bki9/CHX3I5/oU1D8eFACRFkmnGbM2ijKPXsN 0ZlowMWyr4yQZhZPLl9wFj+k4Yu2tyySrgpyZ1t3ce7DxfOs9G8fcDBn+UB5xfC2UHbJ eh9y1DuG1EPa3oG1oCTM9lcn5WFGzQ6I2RENxSq9uDOwj/P6kOKv9MFxAUhEFjtytBP1 rUMtOMKL01y1Ztm3gT/EYvBaBEix3EmieEYS/Ohjg956TYWw8UwyLNwnYQ97wb9GUCad DVUI98uzcEsetna0joeaWjvvsdrdZTGqzL3p+I9ebprSfVAkdSHrmCV6g2fsFKNCBTL5 pA2g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUheVMpVLPMSw3u2fVfoDaUHL4eFHqdXC9ihxyASCkoI6znWUQB eLvekjjJH9egY+9ipovu8O6CvmlZoTosbCapP5yCFPC9
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxOjPTZOgD39KP4TlT9RbQfi1AxkgSuhDazjbBwrEF7/pgYgIiOREGDNZqFCS/UGvF6gkFq742F5lqKgAqCxYw=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:ea0b:: with SMTP id q11mr24918761wrm.233.1555249131867; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 06:38:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8060835.KeXT7UZBJi@kitterma-e6430>
In-Reply-To: <8060835.KeXT7UZBJi@kitterma-e6430>
From: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 09:38:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJ4XoYdPXGvTxVzbU=LcZyLg+Au2mjV1h61+wXtW3C47fcfMvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000ad49505867da83b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/y20Vj4oPrO_v2C6Ab-4xmxou1Qw>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Coverage
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: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:38:56 -0000

Scott, it's almost certainly an undercount as there are domains which
validate for DMARC but do not send reports.

Michael Hammer

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 5:12 PM Scott Kitterman <sklist@kitterman.com>
wrote:

> A couple of days ago I sent a single message to a reasonably large mailing
> list (spf-help, email oriented - so likely not representative, but it's a
> data
> point).  Since I am a list owner, I know how many subscribers there are
> and
> from my DMARC feedback, I know how many times that single message got
> reported.
>
> 43% of them showed up in my DMARC feedback, so that's at least one data
> point
> on breadth of coverage for DMARC feedback.
>
> To do this (at least the way I did it), you need to send a single message
> in a
> reporting period to an email list that does not re-write from and for
> which
> you know how many subscribers there are.
>
> I'm curious what kind of numbers other might be able to come up with.
>
> Scott K
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email