On 10/27/2012 06:08 PM, John Levine wrote: > Of course. One of the problems we've seen with just about every > anti-abuse technique every invented is that some people want it to be > the super anti-spam magic bullet, > Hmm, so what does it mean if people are looking for a "magic bullet" and they get served with a "golden key"...?
I'm wondering how well the legal departments, at your domains that are big enough to have legal departments, understand the fragility of the email ecosystem. I would think that if I was a lawyer who got a glimpse into the technical back side of things, I would be screaming for a whole lot more disclaimers than what I'm seeing, for example, at some leading industry vendors. "This message is from a trusted sender." ... "This message has been verified as coming from the sender." ... Oh, really? I mean, I know that exuding a sense of confidence makes people who don't know what is going on feel better, but ... do those statements constitute legally binding agreements between the provider and the user? <shudder> -Zach _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
