Re: [Extra] Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-extra-sieve-fcc-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov <> Thu, 10 January 2019 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E11130E82; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:36:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=Pfz14clj; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=EQuSX4oF
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9tjGovadLQK2; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B3E0130E73; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:36:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3136F21F23; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:36:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from web5 ([]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:36:08 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h= message-id:from:to:cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:subject:in-reply-to:references:date; s=fm2; bh=xcS V1gY1dHHfK0BO8+K9IEzQDTdK/pPdH+a3k7c/Rk4=; b=Pfz14clj49M//dvogo7 GKkkqR91cm8J6PZq3hEX7LOZoEHOxEN8PDJH5cnigaAo/uT/TGv062ak0Ia58hrU rm3z+k33wUMEEyRCb2ByEhr72wMUKBZVdnkxMyYZ1Ayj1AUEQ+4pV46I1YPr96+n 1BCQssxdnStVHHNrbRW3yjWyFZ8iEqD3vQ5Hh8DgClgkvEuVxppA8Y3b1FUigqvB rV4RcT/wi0nRASqg911HoLcNKwxtrOKHYznOS1UtJj42QOQwOyeQcvXRjafbVDM5 FF/kw7ZFzW552wjWXm0rv44UQ2HOFws+LuVVJsiaAlVAt9F/H5HVqJYmfWqN8Itr 05Q==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=xcSV1gY1dHHfK0BO8+K9IEzQDTdK/pPdH+a3k7c/R k4=; b=EQuSX4oF+OwAGAWUkvl8IprWLiGRGDCD2O6UFFgAaNzD7vHOHJEdNRlG2 Yav6B5euAv2zgRUX4QK6A0VdbSCMcq84vpn3/i+VU8JA4J3R36ZPsaL5/o6ViL+u 7BP1vX35UzsIcSG+qkVv+Xy+Goln980kcdqfnKiwBzUi2rRiVA6KUKIzYydhP5Fd zfFS1iJzw7ETZyp4J27YQbmDq1HfxiCOQtiLJNKcJIDAZJ774HLrEe5KjzGSVHzO FRy2nVbzgr2tOsPLKK314njke8zZ2mCZvi5jO7R0RmuKx/umOvlGgm5QDLn29Z91 Q0UdtidJ0RInRTbnqfA0HKA6xfYzw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:dnQ3XGKWZOWBf10i8vHlMZbZkQ3L2_4wcKfT9HU6bzss0bE8uuGaUg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrfeefgdeltdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepkffhvfgggfgtof fujghfffesrgejreerredtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlvgigvgihucfovghlnhhikhhovhcu oegrrghmvghlnhhikhhovhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmheqnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpegrrghmvghlnhhikhhovhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmhenucevlhhushht vghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:dnQ3XBMVvdnHwu3PNwvJvMGk3-71euqCaweJYB1tqz13qFtLBd3zPA> <xmx:dnQ3XBXjEtoS1s0p2LxQ3N9jvOEDRlCJKQrMYCV42VUJ4Pp5lqUcnA> <xmx:dnQ3XHkFbjhl-llNZ996HdynMLFW2tV_65be9A-aKIJ8LIjDVF-ELQ> <xmx:eHQ3XJP_Gy9NBB_92PonqvW4tgvdIMhXErmMMKlTAy7SVKJVCInEkg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 8CEA49E15D; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:36:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <>
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
To: Ben Campbell <>
Cc:,,, The IESG <>,
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_154713816638291450"
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface - ajax-5ae1f753
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 16:36:06 +0000
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-extra-sieve-fcc-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 16:36:12 -0000

Hi Ben,

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, at 4:27 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>> On Jan 10, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Alexey Melnikov
>> <>; wrote:>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>>> On Jan 10, 2019, at 9:14 AM, Alexey Melnikov
>>>> <>; wrote:>>>> 
>>>> Hi Ben,
>>>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 10, 2019, at 2:42 AM, Alexey Melnikov
>>>>>> <>; wrote:>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Ben,
>>>>>>> On 9 Jan 2019, at 21:51, Ben Campbell <>; wrote:
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> ------>>>>>>> DISCUSS:
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> ------>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks for the work on this. I plan to ballot "yes", but have
>>>>>>> one item I think>>>>>>> needs to be discussed first:
>>>>>>> The security considerations say that this extension adds no new
>>>>>>> considerations>>>>>>> not already present in [RFC5228], [RFC5230], [RFC5435], and
>>>>>>> [RFC6131]. I'm not>>>>>>> sure that that is true.
>>>>>>> It seems like the ability to insert a copy of message into a
>>>>>>> mailbox might have>>>>>>> security and/or privacy considerations.
>>>>>> Can you give me an idea of what you have in mind here, other than
>>>>>> putting the user (Sieve script owner) over quota?>>>>> 
>>>>> I can’t say that I know what the security considerations might
>>>>> be; I’m>>>>> just skeptical that the answer is “no new considerations." The
>>>>> authors>>>>> of 5228 thought “fileinto” could be dangerous. Do we know why?
>>>> I don't remember now, even though I participated in the discussion.>>>>
>>>>>> In particular, what are the possible privacy implications?>>>>> 
>>>>> Could there be issues with, say, shared mailboxes?
>>>> Possibly. I can write something about this.
>>>>> Or storing cleartext for mail that would be sent encrypted?>>>> 
>>>> I can't think of how this is going to be possible. Sieve
>>>> notifications/vacation replies can disclose private information
>>>> from Sieve script owner, but storing such messages doesn't leak any
>>>> more information (ignore shared folders, I agree this might be an
>>>> issue), because such messages will be stored in one of owner's
>>>> mailboxes .>>> 
>>> Doesn’t that make the safety of storing the message dependent on
>>> having reasonable protections for the owner’s mailboxes?>> IMAP access already requires TLS, so all message retrieval is already
>> over encrypted channel.> 
> Is sieve limited to working only over IMAP?
Sieve can talk directly to the mailstore over local API, IPC, some
proprietary protocol, etc. This is not in scope for this document.
> Even if “yes”, that's a data-at-rest
How messages are stored in any particular mailstore is outside the scope
of both Sieve or IMAP. This was never specified in any RFC and this is
not something unique to FCC anyway. But if you can suggest some specific
text to add, the WG can discuss it.
>  vs data-in-motion question.
>> If you meant something else, can you please elaborate?
>>>>> I suspect the answers may be more IMAP related than sieve
>>>>> related, but>>>>> even that might suggest citing something IMAP related.
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Alexey
Best Regards,