[dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

I learned this week that two of the major players in enterprise email security - Proofpoint and IronMail - do not support DMARC. Said one vendor to me, "I understand your inbound use case for DMARC, we just don't hear it very often." So adoption is growing - meaning more and more companies a

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

>As a community promoting DMARC, we have an obligation to champion deployment >at both ends - inbound as well as >outbound. A first step is to let our vendors know DMARC support is >requirement. Um, perhaps they've heard about AOL and Yahoo and have reasonable concerns about losing real mail.

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote: *Solomon, Dianne B* Dianne.Solomon at firstdata.com wrote: As a community p

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

On 06/18/2014 05:32 AM, Solomon, Dianne B via dmarc-discuss wrote: > > I learned this week that two of the major players in enterprise email > security -- Proofpoint and IronMail -- do not support DMARC. Said > one vendor to me, "I understand your inbound use case for DMARC, we > just don't hear

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

Sent from my telephone. Please execute spelling errors. > On Jun 18, 2014, at 18:06, Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss > wrote: > >> On 06/18/2014 05:32 AM, Solomon, Dianne B via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> I learned this week that two of the major players in enterprise email >> security – Proof

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

Apologies for the empty message there everyone - finger slipped in just the exact wrong way while reading on phone. > On Jun 18, 2014, at 18:32, Chris Meidinger via dmarc-discuss > wrote: > > > > Sent from my telephone. Please execute spelling errors. > >> On Jun 18, 2014, at 18:06, Steven

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

On 06/18/2014 08:02 AM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> As a community promoting DMARC, we have an obligation to champion deployment >> at both ends - inbound as well as >> outbound. A first step is to let our vendors know DMARC support is >> requirement. > Um, perhaps they've heard abou

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

>> 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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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.

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

> 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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

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'

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

of our service to other senders. John -Original Message- From: Franck Martin [mailto:fmar...@linkedin.com] Sent: 19 June 2014 17:53 To: John Mears Cc: dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support On Jun 19, 2014, at 7:14 AM, John Mears via dmarc-discuss

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

On Jun 19, 2014, at 7:40 PM, Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss wrote: > 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 >>> intru

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

B2B entity like bigbank.com. Regards, Brian -Original Message- From: dmarc-discuss [mailto:dmarc-discuss-boun...@dmarc.org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 8:12 AM To: dmarc-discuss Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support > - DMARC is effect

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

On Jun 20, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Brian Westnedge via dmarc-discuss wrote: > Here's a simple use case for a spear-phisher where DMARC could be effective > on the inbound: > > 1. Phisher targets a specific exec at bigbank.com > 2. Phisher sends fake FedEx tracking email from fedex.com (p=reject) to

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

Message- > From: Franck Martin [mailto:fmar...@linkedin.com] > Sent: 19 June 2014 17:53 > To: John Mears > Cc: dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org > Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support > > > On Jun 19, 2014, at 7:14 AM, John Mears via dmarc-discuss > w

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

On Jun 20, 2014, at 9:31 AM, Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss wrote: > > On Jun 20, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Brian Westnedge via dmarc-discuss > wrote: > >> Here's a simple use case for a spear-phisher where DMARC could be effective >> on the inbound: >> >> 1. Phisher targets a specific exec at big

Re: [dmarc-discuss] On Inbound DMARC Support

>> Here's a simple use case for a spear-phisher where DMARC could be effective >> on the inbound: >> >> 1. Phisher targets a specific exec at bigbank.com >> 2. Phisher sends fake FedEx tracking email from fedex.com (p=reject) to >> exec's admin with a note from exec for admin to track a shipment