In my experience, besides manual test emails and poorly written internal alert systems, the emails that have no From: headers are in the bounce category.
First case: Clean your own infrastructure and fix your own code Second case: people already do not pay attention to bounces, bounce the bounce will not change the lack of attention... On 11/6/12 8:02 AM, "John Levine" <[email protected]> wrote: >>My understanding is that only a few of the very largest mailbox >>providers cannot put in place blanket "reject email that does not >>contain From: header" rules. It would be nice to have this scenario >>become one of a "fail closed" as opposed to "fail open", but this likely >>won't happen until more awareness is brought to the issue. To start, >>maybe this scenario can become part of email vulnerability testing. > >Mailbox providers will do whatever they think is best for their users. > >I have no idea how many messages without a From: line are malicious, >and how many are just mistakes. I doubt anyone else in this discussion >does, either. Given the zillion other ways there are to disguise >phishes and circumvent DMARC, I see no reason to expect bad guys to >omit From: lines any more than they do now. > >Nobody wants to deliver phish messages, but they don't want to lose >legitimate messages due to over-strict phish heuristics either. But >in view of the extremely small fraction of mail that's missing From:, >I don't see it as a big deal either way. _______________________________________________ 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)
