I tried to lay out why I believe reports with server identity would be
important to domain owners. In this context, verification reduces
ambiguity about whether the HELO name accurately identifies the server
organization. Reverse DNS can also be useful, but it may indicate the ISP
rather than
No hat, as usual.
On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 7:03 AM Douglas Foster <
dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it not a violation of GDPR to require DMARC participants to collect and
> transmit data that is not essential to DMARC?
>
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding of GDPR is that
Can you explain what this would provide? Section 4.1.4 of RFC 5321 says of
the EHLO parameter:
An SMTP server MAY verify that the domain name argument in the EHLO
command actually corresponds to the IP address of the client.
However, if the verification fails, the server MUST NOT refuse
On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 6:29 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Sat 22/Oct/2022 18:25:55 +0200 Dotzero wrote:
> > Unaligned signatures are orthogonal/irrelevant to DMARC. They may be
> useful in
> > other contexts. In the DKIM standard, signatures mean that the signer is
> > asserting some
For ARC, we need to add indicators for:
ARC chain detected (maybe)
ARC chain broken or unbroken, and
ARC chain trusted (as a favorable factor for message disposition.)
The domain owner does not need to know the details of which chain
configurations I am willing to trust.
The domain owner cannot
Is it not a violation of GDPR to require DMARC participants to collect and
transmit data that is not essential to DMARC?
The decision of how to handle indirect flows is outside the ability of a
domain owner to control. Knowing that a message was accepted by local
policy says that the source is
On Sat 22/Oct/2022 18:25:55 +0200 Dotzero wrote:
Unaligned signatures are orthogonal/irrelevant to DMARC. They may be useful in
other contexts. In the DKIM standard, signatures mean that the signer is
asserting some (unspecified) responsibility for the signed message. That may be
useful for
