It appears that Todd Herr <todd.h...@valimail.com> said: >As for law enforcement, I don't see "Officer, that unknown guy over there >did something bad, and I can't show you direct evidence of it, you're just >gonna have to trust me when I say he did it X times" as a motivator, >especially if the bad guy is likely to be out of the local office's >jurisdiction or even country.
More than that, there is no reason to assume that failures mean that something illegal is going on. Just saying, well *I* didn't authorize it won't do it. I occasionally see big bursts of failures that I know from the timing are completely benign, they mean one of my users sent a few messages to a large mailing list. This discussion strikes me as egregious mission creep, maybe mission gallop. We understand fairly well how reports can help senders adjust their sending practices to match their sending policies. But I would not want to waste any more time speculating about what else someone might imagine using them for. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
