On 12/31/18 3:08 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 12/31/18 10:36 AM, David Gibbs via Mailman-Users wrote: >> I'm curious as to how people are setting >> 'dmarc_none_moderation_action'... which controls how Mailman handles >> domains with a dmarc policy action of none (like gmail.com). >> >> Is there a compelling reason to set it to Yes so that messages from such >> domains are munged or wrapped? > > No. There is no compelling reason to set it to Yes. It does not affect > mail delivery. It only affects the reports sent by list recipient's > service providers to the original From: domain which publishes p=none. > Read the entire thread at > <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/1539384>. The originator of > that bug report would like every Mailman list to apply > dmarc_moderation_action unconditionally to posts From: domains that > publish any DMARC policy including p=none. > > Implementing this as a list option does not satisfy the originator > because he is concerned about mail From: his own domain which publishes > p=none to lists operated by others which he does not control. > > It would have been better if this feature had never been implemented, > and it is not in Mailman 3. > I would say that the 'backscatter' in the report is actual real information telling the postmaster for the domain that their current policies do not align with a a DMARC policy of reject (or maybe even quarantine) as they are allowing there users to use RFC compliant re-mailing systems (aka mailing lists) that don't naturally meet the requirements of the (in my opinion poorly designed) DMARC system.
-- Richard Damon ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org