I believe there are some announcements expected shortly, and both Symantec and
Halon are already offering it as a cloud filtering service. (I think I'm
forgetting another service...)
--Steve.
Indeed, the Symantec hosted email security service now sports a check box for
enabling DMARC for inbo
Yes, but what I expect is that the cert fails due to email address miss match
when comparing your cert to the list's address, not mine.
PAUL ROCK
Senior Programmer/Analyst | AOL Mail
P: 703-265-5734 | C: 703-980-8380
AIM: paulsrock
44900 Prentice Dr. | Dulles, VA | 20166-9305
On Jun 10, 2014, at
In article you write:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Yes, but what I expect is that the cert fails due to email address miss match
>when comparing your cert to the
>list's address, not mine.
Right -- if the address in the S/MIME signature doesn't match the
address on the From: line, t
>> Nothing personal, but like 99.9% of the people in the world, I care
>> nothing about your brand.
>
>Which has no bearing on whether or not inbound DMARC filtering should be
>considered for corporate infrastructure.
The point of DMARC is for mailbox operators to defend their own users.
If their
On Jun 19, 2014, at 7:14 AM, John Mears via dmarc-discuss
wrote:
>
> I believe there are some announcements expected shortly, and both Symantec
> and Halon are already offering it as a cloud filtering service. (I think I'm
> forgetting another service...)
>
> --Steve.
>
> Indeed, the Syman
On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:22 AM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss
wrote:
>
> The point of DMARC is for mailbox operators to defend their own users.
> If their users are suffering from the kind of stuff that DMARC deters,
> they should use it, unrelated to what any outsiders want. I discard
> unsign
On 06/19/2014 08:22 AM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote:
>
>> But if it can help put any dent whatsoever in the endless stream of
>> corporate data breaches, for example, I think it's a net benefit for
>> consumers.
Before I continue: No, DMARC is not designed to prevent data breaches,
and wil
On Jun 19, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss
wrote:
> On 06/19/2014 08:22 AM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote:
>>
>>> But if it can help put any dent whatsoever in the endless stream of
>>> corporate data breaches, for example, I think it's a net benefit for
>>> consumers.
> Same-domain phishing is highly effective, so anything that addresses it is a
> prudent
>control to deploy.
Yes, I believe it.
> Thus, inbound DMARC filtering is desirable for corporate infrastructure.
No, for this threat it's irrelevant.
Surely we don't have to explain why you don't need DMA
On 06/19/2014 05:23 PM, Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss
> wrote:
>> However DMARC can help remediate a vector commonly used to initiate an
>> intrusion against corporate networks,
> I suspect you mean mitigate (although remedi
On 06/19/2014 06:58 PM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote:
>> Same-domain phishing is highly effective, so anything that addresses it is a
>> prudent
>> control to deploy.
> Yes, I believe it.
>
>> Thus, inbound DMARC filtering is desirable for corporate infrastructure.
> No, for this threat it'
11 matches
Mail list logo
