IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [marf] Reviewers for draft-kucherawy-marf-source-ports

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Fri, 20 April 2012 00:08 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 2D52911E80D2 for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 kq7lFteNFTCH for <marf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.cloudmark.com (cmgw1.cloudmark.com [208.83.136.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6DED11E80CE for <marf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com ([72.5.239.25]) by mail.cloudmark.com with bizsmtp id 008T1j0010ZaKgw0108Tnm; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:08:27 -0700
X-CMAE-Match: 0
X-CMAE-Score: 0.00
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=RaES+iRv c=1 sm=1 a=LdFkGDrDWH2mcjCZERnC4w==:17 a=8Ubwy9MkvaUA:10 a=TvhglxwP5TMA:10 a=zutiEJmiVI4A:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=m0sUsssksoC-6TbL61QA:9 a=ptliux8pRnCy2vGo9_8A:7 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=Zyl6g_yW8uPZHDCE:21 a=8Lwp5I40ZqD760t_:21 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=1c55qxmzZU_W5dvcTzQA:9 a=o_umdiE_F6l8xAFpjlMA:7 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=LdFkGDrDWH2mcjCZERnC4w==:117
Received: from EXCH-MBX901.corp.cloudmark.com ([fe80::addf:849a:f71c:4a82]) by exch-htcas901.corp.cloudmark.com ([fe80::2524:76b6:a865:539c%10]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:08:26 -0700
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: Steve Atkins <steve@wordtothewise.com>, "marf@ietf.org" <marf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [marf] Reviewers for draft-kucherawy-marf-source-ports
Thread-Index: Ac0eWIzAWiByKHBVQYeTaXZAPo6wLAAP01CAAAU64KAABad+AAAOl9tA
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:08:26 +0000
Message-ID: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280FB7E9@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280FAF8D@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <938CD663-D2D5-4E65-B3D4-B02424DC7124@wordtothewise.com> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280FB6A1@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <12A039B2-3B42-49B1-887F-06A18B0C6ECA@wordtothewise.com>
In-Reply-To: <12A039B2-3B42-49B1-887F-06A18B0C6ECA@wordtothewise.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.22.1.156]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280FB7E9exchmbx901corpclo_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudmark.com; s=default; t=1334880507; bh=xyDjApJS3dtQ4Xo2mpng0NJSsZhfeh61bQjW/zyC9W4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=WuMPWNvUu5VzynfQgkzoH1tcKfdfI7I0mghAwqT221uWSYJIlhh98Jha6SAuMlawa Hn1smJQWEU6ryqL1Qu0gfieexrzwkrfN/Lt1f45DVptTUcR5XbbLQGGLKJu2Cxzl9+ BimumfhWn8Ae2DAPO/hW9MdeB30q1kaqZPYrSR44=
Subject: Re: [marf] Reviewers for draft-kucherawy-marf-source-ports
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: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:08:29 -0000

From: marf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:marf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 5:01 PM
To: marf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [marf] Reviewers for draft-kucherawy-marf-source-ports

I'm not sure that [LOG] *as applied to email* has value in the real world. Sure, a mix of spam and legitimate mail might leak out from a NAT, but the fix for that is to not allow port 25 outbound from the NAT and route it to a smarthost (where it can be filtered, throttled and have correct Received headers to identify the user added) instead.

It's reasonably harmless to add this information to ARF reports, but to standardize it implies that allowing outbound port 25 from a carrier-grade NAT is acceptable practice, which goes against the "don't let end-users or dynamically assigned users send mail directly to receiver MXes" and "don't allow port 25 through a NAT" principles we've been pushing for a while.

[MSK: I don't think publishing this extension amounts to an endorsement of allowing outbound port 25 from within a CGN.  Why is ARF the right place to make that stand?  For cases where such is allowed, the data exchange is desired.  Preventing ARF from doing it won't change ISP policies.]


What about ident?

[MSK: Does anyone still use that?]

Sure. I'm not suggesting people use it, but this proposal is a less reliable, less privacy-friendly, replacement for ident so I thought I'd at least mention it.

[MSK: I don't think ident has enough current support to make it a viable alternative.  How is adding ports to ARF reports a privacy concern?]

Cheers,
  Steve

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email