1:1 abusive mail flows are not particularly common, but they do currently exist, and will continue to exist, regardless of whether they are direct or indirect mail flows. That's not a flaw here.
Anti-spam/anti-abuse systems are more suited for the role of mitigating 1:1 abuse than any authentication standard. On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 8:49 AM Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/9/2025 9:44 AM, Bron Gondwana wrote: > > I think this is the root of our disagreement. I fundamentally disagree > that there will be legitimate scenarios that match replay abuse scenarios > with DKIM2. > > > When there is a rich set of plausible usage scenarios that cover > legitimate and bogus examples, and a careful analysis of how DKIM2 will > prevent replay and permit legitimate reposting, for each of them, then > perhaps your faith will be justified. > > So far, assertions of such faith lack a publicly-shared basis. > > d/ > > -- > Dave Crocker > > Brandenburg InternetWorkingbbiw.net > bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social > mast: @[email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
