IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [marf] FW: Feedback on: ARF feedback type Virus/_report subdomain

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Thu, 18 August 2011 21:44 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: marf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CABA121F884C for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2mPdmT3EGUGw for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6328E21F85B9 for <marf@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:44:57 -0700
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: Message Abuse Report Format working group <marf@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:44:55 -0700
Thread-Topic: [marf] FW: Feedback on: ARF feedback type Virus/_report subdomain
Thread-Index: AcxOLWzC3U7D65imQoWp08ef0JxcJQPwjQ7w
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF7E9@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <1311898476.94112.YahooMailClassic@web45310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <BDE8B005-32CC-43C5-8EE5-E9BBF190D89B@cybernothing.org>
In-Reply-To: <BDE8B005-32CC-43C5-8EE5-E9BBF190D89B@cybernothing.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [marf] FW: Feedback on: ARF feedback type Virus/_report subdomain
X-BeenThere: marf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Message Abuse Report Format working group discussion list <marf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/marf>, <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/marf>
List-Post: <mailto:marf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf>, <mailto:marf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 21:44:02 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of J.D. Falk
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 1:23 PM
> To: Message Abuse Report Format working group
> Subject: Re: [marf] FW: Feedback on: ARF feedback type Virus/_report
> subdomain
> 
> Using ARF for reports from MUAs has been discussed many times, but
> hasn't really ever been implemented (except for a Thunderbird plugin,
> years ago, now lost to history.)  I'd love to see somebody try it, but
> until they do I don't think we can call it a common practice.

However, "Report Spam" buttons, including ours, do send proprietary feedback of some kind in a lot of instances.  Having an ARF implementation would be great.

Maybe we should chase down that Thunderbird plugin...  :-)

> MARF is already widely accepted.  There are dozens of report generators
> and literally thousands of report consumers, nearly all following the
> use case described in draft-jdfalk-marf-as.  That's part of why there's
> disagreement -- we don't want to change MARF in ways which would be
> incompatible with the established userbase.

There are some people in MAAWG from the AV vendors.  I wonder if they'd be interested in FBLs that use ARF for the purpose of reporting suspected virus payloads.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email