IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jmap] Address Validation (was Re: Submission)

Paul Smith <paul@pscs.co.uk> Tue, 25 April 2017 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@pscs.co.uk>
X-Original-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D0113166D for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.622
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 S9XGb7f8leH7 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pscs.co.uk (mail.pscs.co.uk [188.65.177.237]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CDA813165B for <jmap@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: mail.pscs.co.uk; spf=none; auth=pass (cram-md5) smtp.auth=paul
Received: from lmail.pscs.co.uk ([82.68.5.206]) by mail.pscs.co.uk ([188.65.177.237] running VPOP3) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 17:23:32 +0100
Authentication-Results: lmail.pscs.co.uk; spf=none; auth=pass (cram-md5) smtp.auth=paul
Received: from [192.168.66.101] ([192.168.66.101]) by lmail.pscs.co.uk ([192.168.66.70] running VPOP3) with ESMTPSA; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 17:18:08 +0100
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, "jmap@ietf.org" <jmap@ietf.org>
References: <1492996915.3310412.953749536.0F1C8B46@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170424014957.39235.qmail@ary.lan> <emb951e04d-3dc9-4244-915b-21bd272245ff@bodybag> <alpine.OSX.2.20.1704240925190.68584@ary.qy> <e41c88ed-2ed5-47b8-923c-bfac12334808@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <DB03A7F421F2B9E4A8C6AD1D@caldav.corp.apple.com> <6319482c-e53f-4483-870b-844e23030f8c@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <A9622742-D931-4975-9572-04878949EDDE@fugue.com> <a9edd67d-64fc-56cc-a64d-92db10e3369d@pscs.co.uk> <em84e4d1f0-cfb3-46c6-99e0-a3398bda2bc4@bodybag> <CA68A753DA49B845CDCDD17A@caldav.corp.apple.com> <b76a67ec-28df-a13f-9960-a61ce1cec47a@pscs.co.uk> <em2c4fdcdc-cce2-4d50-9f29-00d64006366d@bodybag> <dd3fe531-4aa6-947e-c107-dbc96ffc9652@pscs.co.uk> <em8c4826da-5dc7-449c-b1f4-be9abc3a137a@bodybag>
From: Paul Smith <paul@pscs.co.uk>
Message-ID: <6a74e88a-8376-9879-a918-5b9a3d8a4802@pscs.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 17:18:07 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <em8c4826da-5dc7-449c-b1f4-be9abc3a137a@bodybag>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Authenticated-Sender: paul
X-Server: VPOP3 Enterprise V7.2 - Registered
X-Organisation: Paul Smith Computer Services
X-VPOP3Tester: 12 345
X-Authenticated-Sender: paul
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/tpVbiGEI40V5klZyy6HqYdVQfCI>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] Address Validation (was Re: Submission)
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 16:23:48 -0000

On 25/04/2017 17:06, Adrien de Croy wrote:
> On 25/04/2017 15:37, Adrien de Croy wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd expect a lot of servers don't honour SUCCESS DSNs for a number 
>>> of reasons (privacy, spam avalanche etc).
>>
>> I'm not sure of that - is it any worse than accepting a message with 
>> a 2xx response?
>
> it sure is, especially if the return path is invalid / spoofed / victim.
>
> It's a whole new email, rather than a protocol response code.

Well, you'd get the same effect with RELAYED/FAILED DSNs... I'm not sure 
the fact that it's a SUCCESS DSN would make any difference as far as 
that goes.

(BATV FTW?)

> If it uses emails for messages yes.  Which it probably would. 

It'd pretty much have to use messages if it was to be scalable.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email