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

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>The question is what value, if any, does that add. As I see it the big problem
>is that nothing prevents goggle.com from signing a pointer to Google's logo.
>Or a logo that looks very, very similar to Google's.
>
>Until and unless BIMI offers a solution to this problem, I'm afraid I see very
>little value here.

That's where we came in, the recipient MTA validates the logo, adds a
header pointing to the validated logo, and adds a magic IMAP flag to
say that it's done so.

I'm not saying that's a particularly good way to do it, but it's not
like they haven't thought about it.  There's also the mess of how in
the real world you determine whether the owner of a domain should be
using any particular logo.

R's,
John

PS: there's some urgency here since the big gorillas are showing
sender logos now and not doing a wonderful job of it.