On Thu 10/Nov/2022 18:00:41 +0100 John Levine wrote:
Does it mean that it is enough to add a second mailbox in order to have the
failure of the relevant DKIM signature become unmeaningful and accept with
dmarc=none?
No, of course not.
But then, what should a mail filter do when it meets one?
Do whatever it does when there's no DMARC info.
From: Your Bank <dmarc-protected@bank.example>, "
skip DMARC" <he.he@spammer.example>
As I hope we all remember, DMARC is not the FUSSP. It's part of a filtering
process.
In my case, I am likely to put anything with multi-address From: header fields
in
the spam folder since I don't ever recall getting a legit one other than to
prove
it is possible.
Some people edit From: when a message, possibly sent officially to an
institution, carries text that has to be ascribed to multiple authors. The
possibility to edit From: is relatively new in the MUA I use. A compliant
Sender: is (still) missing.
Clearly, outlawing such practice requires to wrap the content into an
attachment that supports multiple authors. It's depleting a nice functionality.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
