IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Tue, 09 September 2014 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@daboo.name>
X-Original-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: endymail@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96D4C1A6FF0 for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 09:24:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.552
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652] autolearn=ham
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 H4AX8HnzdkAL for <endymail@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 09:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 968E01A6FE1 for <endymail@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 09:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ACF87F22C for <endymail@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:18:54 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WV8F9xou1KmU for <endymail@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:18:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1781287F221 for <endymail@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:18:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:24:42 -0400
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: endymail@ietf.org
Message-ID: <A0D257477F9656E41C1EEE6D@caldav.corp.apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140909161038.GW26920@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <540AABF8.8000605@cisco.com> <CAMm+Lwh1JJQTOgRN_31b3+oTreeHzntBxx5sNeAFQAwnac9trw@mail.gmail.com> <540C5BE1.6010405@qti.qualcomm.com> <540CCA3E.8020505@qti.qualcomm.com> <alpine.BSF.2.11.1409071906310.16169@joyce.lan> <20140908030941.GT26920@mournblade.imrryr.org> <CAMm+LwhMsx7pGJo_pRPUWj_GqZfD_s78z+KMw_YOZ92LsoExMg@mail.gmail.com> <20140909155541.GF19979@vegoda.org> <20140909161038.GW26920@mournblade.imrryr.org>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0b1 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size=558
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/endymail/27Om3JTDS2Ocs4W7EJIz-Ieyoi4
Subject: Re: [Endymail] spam versus cleartext
X-BeenThere: endymail@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <endymail.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/endymail/>
List-Post: <mailto:endymail@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/endymail>, <mailto:endymail-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 16:24:52 -0000

Hi Viktor,

--On September 9, 2014 at 4:10:38 PM +0000 Viktor Dukhovni 
<ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> wrote:

> So the picture is rather complex, ... Neither a pure "person"
> identity nor a pure "role" identity is right for all cases.

Yes, endymail has to cope with typical "corporate" work practices. In 
particular, when Alice goes on vacation, her boss, co-worker, assistant etc 
should be able to read her email. The legal department probably needs 
access to everyone's email. Do we want endymail to be compatible with such 
requirements?

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email