On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 10:33 AM Brotman, Alex <Alex_Brotman=
40comcast....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> How will we handle the ever-changing definition of "weak"?
>

> --
> Alex Brotman
> Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy
> Comcast
>
>
This is why I don't believe "weak" should be included in any normative
manner. I'm not sure that it should be defined for reporting. I think a
better approach is some verbiage about weak signatures as a problem.
Perhaps for reporting something like "Local Policy: weak signature" but
leave it up to the validator to deal with the weak signature decision
outside of DMARC. It's really a DKIM issue.

Michael Hammer
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to