Re: [ietf-822] WSJ/gmail/ML, was a permission to...

Brandon Long <blong@google.com> Tue, 06 May 2014 17:34 UTC

Return-Path: <blong@google.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10DDA1A0230 for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.029
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.029 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 PpiPdLeESThg for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-x231.google.com (mail-oa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A321A0196 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id eb12so1865150oac.8 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Tue, 06 May 2014 10:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=wNecNL+zaXOT5g8bs/+ayoxOWn1F2hjPyMYdBXg+iZY=; b=oegnGCm1Azq/DbybWIgByVVHPlMAOp8nAxJMWTwmJz4LtNCy3Rz+DqJUKvKfnMFJiI bXwH/ZVx69OTwmSfqbF396dSE96wh0hZyaAqtKhmcaiSrvns9A1+an1HxHb58kwjqoEN tqZMtZj2VZzQTuIbl+PsxaVFBSYnpAL38dPIaL9477M7jLCRJ/4eisE7ysk2ZTtIIg3v chkD3IQWJPS0h6UEa2qKaI+45TJT8iE4GbrrJ4g2DdUrDvB+c7rz6ADHmp3i+Gg4iwL0 3kGZo4vQDcdHC3V6oou7OW7rJgDM1obhw8JLjpZXPqLKgGrecpaq+d4EWvqNN40vo0RE FGKA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=wNecNL+zaXOT5g8bs/+ayoxOWn1F2hjPyMYdBXg+iZY=; b=LAgldIX7JF1RP3AnqYFuNiTLE2OX6e7wTtdOZi38eD/YUL287L/E1Hx2Z5qjeW753B CD8UEHqIgUe9BEpufUUc/FQvVsUYdioyVf1ZQec1JB/1xo+5I3Stfpor4pC4Qto1Ezu+ 86k115wfbB0vSuJvncolUXpRSo7SDkix6bmXflcU41JKekMDfyAIJSOZpfECjVO/KZcf w22f2WEjUN2Hu+h6w3Akizif3s9VCypiMe5DUKY+rjHecjR/tEw1uRYSfCStHonR4/Gy 42jDbvS1c0jvy8KqY3W2bJZwjuAUMrGXG6kAsrJRy0YWLSsBpUauy4Ycth/qdeQzQuEL o17A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl6C2PuWvTx5bYEnAqgXFwXRVE795ZUhP/UCtBonQXbcf0qFT1c24SrbKfaoJXvBcpG5Tow
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.134.137 with SMTP id pk9mr40432526oeb.40.1399397692649; Tue, 06 May 2014 10:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.224.166 with HTTP; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1405050957230.56860@joyce.lan>
References: <20140418123721.3610.qmail@joyce.lan> <5365357D.2020101@tana.it> <CABa8R6tSpasb7od7ixQXLXnV0Q+3jFNPVKAw+-+Fd_7traumiQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1405050957230.56860@joyce.lan>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 10:34:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CABa8R6t4QK2qKw-5pJpMTnqCPWCyus=u8D+BoYRamhQbT=sBHA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brandon Long <blong@google.com>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b471dfa5edc2804f8beaaee"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/mGjbIFVyLRi7_RDj7AOPO9XtuAA
Cc: ietf-822@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-822] WSJ/gmail/ML, was a permission to...
X-BeenThere: ietf-822@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Internet Message Format \[RFC 822, RFC 2822, RFC 5322\]" <ietf-822.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-822/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-822@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 17:34:58 -0000

On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:03 AM, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> Those two problems can be solved in different ways.  Gmail could use a
>>> third party's submission server just like they use its pop/imap one.
>>>
>>
>> Gmail does allow you to use a third party submission server, and it looks
>> like we may have to encourage its use even more in the future.
>>
>
> I'm not sure how realistic that is in practice for users who aren't
> uber-nerds.
>
> To set up to use Yahoo's submission server from Gmail, I tried to
> configure it in the popup Gmail provided, which failed with an error
> message that told me to go log in at Yahoo.  I did, didn't help.  After
> some poking around I found a message in my Yahoo inbox that suggested I
> needed an app specific password.  (How many people will realize that Yahoo
> considers Gmail to be an app?)  It provided a link to the place in their
> credential server to create such a password, which is otherwise not easy to
> find.  So I finally found it, and made a password for Gmail, and then went
> back to Gmail, and used it, and indeed it worked.
>
> But how many people without CS degrees are going to be able to go through
> all that?


Yes, it runs up against that other problem, that username/passwords are no
longer near useful enough.  In Gmail's case, you would only need an
application specific password if you have one-time passwords enabled on
your account.  The error message when trying to use your password would
give you to this url:
https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/185833which should be
enough for some non-CS types to figure it out.  Its less
than ideal, however.

But, even then, we have
http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2014/04/new-security-measures-will-affect-older.htmlwhich
means that trying to use a password on an account isn't going to work
all that well in the future.  OAUTH2 SASL is almost an RFC, but using it
still has scaling issues for clients, in that there is no
discovery/registration protocol yet.  Theoretically, once all that is
accomplished and implemented, trying to authorize smtp-msa from one account
to another via the web would be as simple as an ACL pop-up that you can
agree to.

Clearly, that level of interop is a bit further away than we'd want any
solution to the DMARC issue.

Brandon