On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 6:14 AM Douglas Foster <
dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Malicious impersonation creates a need for authentication. If the list
> makes changes that disable the originator's authentication, then it is the
> list's problem to find a way to convince the
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 6:35 PM Douglas Foster <
dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Consequently, the problem remains: How does an evaluator distinguish
> between a legitimate list and a malicious attack?
>
If we had a reliable answer to that, this would've been over ages ago.
Scott Kitterman writes:
> You can equally argue that these receivers are merely following the
> policy advice provided by the sending domain (it has reject right in
> the name) and this problem is entirely generated by sender's
> inappropriate use of p=reject.
True, thats why the proposed text
On July 8, 2023 6:16:46 PM UTC, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>Brotman, Alex writes:
>> I suspect the portion that instructs receivers to not act solely on
>> p=reject may be ignored by a fair set of receivers. I'm not
>> necessarily opposed to the language below, just that it seems odd to
>> create
Brotman, Alex writes:
> I suspect the portion that instructs receivers to not act solely on
> p=reject may be ignored by a fair set of receivers. I'm not
> necessarily opposed to the language below, just that it seems odd to
> create language that we know will be ignored.
If receivers ignore
It appears that Richard Clayton said:
>They then moved on to just using random identities from the same domain
>as the recipient. This led a great many Yahoo users to believe that a
>great many other Yahoo users had been compromised, leading to a
>significant loss of faith in the integrity of
*Note: The following is a general rule of thumb for me.*
From my functional specification protocol language coding standpoint:
MUST --> NO OPTION. Technically enabled with no switch to disable.
SHOULD -> OPTIONAL, Default is ON, enabled
MAY --> OPTIONAL, Default is ON or OFF depending on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message , Murray S. Kucherawy writes
>Some of my IETF mentors (ahem) taught me some stuff about the use
>of SHOULD [NOT] that have stuck with me, and I'm going to pressure
>test this against that advice. Let's see how this goes.
On Sat 08/Jul/2023 02:44:19 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 7:55 AM Barry Leiba wrote:
It is therefore critical that domains that host users who might
post messages to mailing lists SHOULD NOT publish p=reject.
Domains that choose to publish p=reject
