Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ?

Alexey Melnikov <> Wed, 27 February 2019 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168B2130DE7 for <>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:08:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QTY__rdtn1Tm for <>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:08:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA4E1200B3 for <>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:08:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1551276479;; s=june2016;; bh=zNuL1w15utV3jr4af2NNrDpahezWY4x38x74ypgsQUM=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=T1cQDMOKnJah46iP/iIvKOXgeTdg1MZy8HQmYka22XW3cu0gMnD9UNA0vDi568GsWZlGgW ItrZFY0Gx4fCI6riuTSLytJ81oILRnP1cMRejAIIYIq6vGKKu12BCeSCsSazPS5fH9mOBW 7IiIvc+4aEZJaPfVdlKp8LP23LQa4M8=;
Received: from [] ( []) by (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:07:58 +0000
To: Arnt Gulbrandsen <>, "John R. Levine" <>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1902262150050.14048@ary.local> <>
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:07:44 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0
In-Reply-To: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:08:02 -0000

On 27/02/2019 06:32, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:

> On Wednesday 27 February 2019 04:06:36 CET, John R. Levine wrote:
>> There is this thing called BIMI that is being debated elsewhere in 
>> the IETF.  Leaving aside for the moment the issue of whether it's a 
>> good idea in the first place, it invents an IMAP feature that seems 
>> dodgy to me.
>> When an MTA that supports BIMI delivers a message into the mailstore, 
>> it adds a header that tells MUAs where to find a logo to show next to 
>> the message.  (Think of it as x-face for corporations.)  Since bad 
>> people could phish victims with their own header with a misleading 
>> image, BIMI invents a new IMAP flag that only the delivery MTA can 
>> set on messages where it has added a virtuous header.  An MUA can 
>> test it to decide whether to show the logo.  Other IMAP or POP 
>> clients can't set the flag, but it presumably stays with the message 
>> if it's moved from one folder to another.
> There is a sort of expectation with IMAP that you can copy messages. 
> That you can copy your entire mail archive from fastmail to gmail and 
> the result will work as before. There are programs to do this, 
> imapsync for example, and doesn't one of the big MUAs have this 
> builtin, too?
> BIMI wouldn't. With BIMI, the copy would be degraded, not complete.

To expand on this: the answer would depend on whether a particular IMAP 
server supports a particular IMAP keyword or storage of arbitrary IMAP 
keywords. Support for arboitrary IMAP keywords is relatively widely 
implemented feature in IMAP servers, but unfortunately it is an optional