I have always found it a tragicomedy that an archaic piece of software
blocks/trumps any improvements to our space.
</2cents>

Regards,
Damon Sauer
Email Services Manager @ IBM


eMessage issues? For follow-up questions, please contact product support:
[email protected] and [email protected]



From:   Terry Zink <[email protected]>
To:     Al Iverson <[email protected]>, DMARC natterage
            <[email protected]>,
Date:   12/26/2013 06:40 PM
Subject:        Re: [dmarc-discuss] the endless list argument, was Opinions,
            Please?
Sent by:        [email protected]



Maybe an update to the DMARC FAQ's would be useful here about how to work
around this?

http://dmarc.org/faq.html#s_3

http://dmarc.org/faq.html#r_2

-- Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Al Iverson
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 2:26 PM
To: DMARC natterage
Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] the endless list argument, was Opinions,
Please?

I found it trivial to modify my own mailing list software to simply rewrite
the From header so that the sender and visible from are "the list" instead
of "the person." That way the list domain's reputation and policy apply,
not the poster's. I recognize that John abhors this as a solution, but I do
want to remind folks that there are other options to make everything play
together nicely, if desired. Time will tell with regard to what ends up
getting most often adopted.

Regards,
Al Iverson

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 2:32 PM, John R Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I don't follow your logic John. Why would the DMARC policy of one
>> domain affect the health of the mailing list for subscribers from other
domains?
>
>
> One user, who we'll call Mason, is a subscriber to the list.  Another
> user, who we'll call Franck, subscribes from an address with p=reject.
>
> Franck sends a few messages to the list.  The list adds a subject tag
> or message footer which breaks the DMARC signature, and it remails the
> message with the list's bounce address, so DMARC fails.  Mason's mail
> system checks DMARC on the incoming list mail, finds that Franck's
> DMARC says to reject it, so it rejects it.  After a couple of
> rejections, the list's automatic bounce handling removes Mason from the
list.  Oops.
>
> This isn't hypothetical -- back when ADSP was new, a couple of
> overenthusiastic implementations of ADSP bounced people off the IETF's
> mailing lists exactly this way.
>
> The obvious defense is for list software to check Franck's DMARC on
> incoming mail and not to accept his mail if it says p=quarantine or
> p=reject.  I've already adjusted my lists to do that.  It turned out
> to be a one-line config fix in majordomo2.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> PS: If anyone is going to suggest that list software needs to be
> rewritten not to break DKIM signatures, please don't.  We've had that
> argument many times already, list software isn't broken, and it ain't
going to happen.
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
>
> NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note
> Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)



--
Al Iverson | Chicago, IL | (312) 725-0130
Twitter: @aliverson / www.spamresource.com
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss

NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well
terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)

_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss

NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well
terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)

<<inline: graycol.gif>>

_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss

NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms 
(http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)

Reply via email to