>> No, all it says is "we signed this mail." A signer with a good >> reputation will presumably rarely sign mail where the From: address >> actively misidentifies the sender, but that's a second order effect. > > Right, and because the domain owner has signed the email, they can be held > responsible for abuse. At least, to a greater extent than when the mail > hasn't touched any system that they have any control over.
It is certainly reasonable to say that the signer has a good reputation, so we will accept his mail. But that's different from saying that the signer has a good reputation, so the From: address must be "real". >> Once again, this sounds like a solution searching for a problem. I've >> done the occasional bozofiltering in mailing lists, but because the >> people were bozos, not spammers. > > The problem is reputation assignment. Different recipients (of mail from the > same list) will have different views of the sender's reputation. > > But, the problem is real, and recognised. Mailing lists break signatures. It is certainly a fact that mailing lists break signatures. But there are differences of opinion whether it's a problem. Although I've seen plenty of assertions that it's a problem, we're a bit thin with real life as opposed to hypothetical scenarios where the broken signature leads to bad results. The only one I've seen so far is the ADSP+list -> lost or rejected mail. I would say that is misuse of ADSP, not a list problem, since we were quite aware of it and in Appendix B of RFC 5617 we say not to do that. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
