[Speaking as just another participant, not the chair...]
On 11 Nov 2026, at 2:27, Richard Clayton wrote:
IMHO an unknown or unauthorized intermediary should not receive the
same treatment as a gateway explicitly trusted by the sender or the
recipient.
There is nothing in DKIM2 that requires you to accept email that you
know to have been modified by an intermediary. However, many mailbox
providers wish to do exactly that (because the Internet is full of
intermediaries that alter messages). DKIM2 gives them considerable
scope to build reputation systems to label intermediaries and types of
modification. But we are not going to say that they are not allowed to
accept particular types of email -- their systems, their rules.
I basically agree with both Pietro and Richard here: I suspect that in
the end, common practice is going to be "If the change recipe only
modified the Subject and added a minimal (amount TBD) to the end of the
body, then by policy I'll accept the message without a change to the
From. Otherwise, by policy I'm going to bounce it unless I have a
pre-existing trust relationship with the intermediary who did it." This
is why I think the who discussion of From alignment and donotmodify is
really kind of moot and not worth mentioning in the spec: If the changes
are deemed to be "minimal", then the end system is going to let it
through, and if the changes are more than "minimal" (which would include
absolutely any deletion of bits of the body) by an unknown intermediary,
they'll be rejected, regardless of a donotmodify or canmodify flag.
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
