What I (we?) don't want is that DMARC affects the reputation of the email
as spammers will publish a DMARC record if it lowers their spamassassin
score.


Also I think the RFC specifies that aggregate reports are an integral part
of DMARC. You can't develop one without the other.

The opendmarc milter/proxy way seems the way to go, spamassassin is
installed this way on linux boxes, I don't see why it would not be as easy
to install opendmarc.

On 1/10/13 1:04 PM, "Tom Hendrikx" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I was pondering on using DMARC in a passive way: implementing a plugin
>for spamassassin (or similar) that would only score/reject/quarantine
>based on DMARC alignment and policy, and not handle all the complex
>DMARC stuff (mainly database setup, ruf/rua sending).
>
>This would lower the implementation doorstep to test DMARC effectiveness
>for interested receivers: such an implementation would need nothing but
>access to DNS, making system administration (both setup and maintenance)
>a breeze.
>
>I do see the risk that, while intended for evaluation, such a setup
>would lower the incentive to switch to a full-blown setup such as the
>existing milter solution later on. The specification document has some
>notices pointing out the importance of the feedback loop (and I
>understand and support them), which are blatantly ignored by the above.
>But I still see an implementation benefit for small receiving sites,
>whose reports would be less significant to senders (IMHO), as existing
>large sites will also send them reports.
>
>My personal point of view: getting a DMARC sender (monitor) policy
>running was quite easy for my personal domain, but I did not have time
>to implement the receiving side yet, thus I don't get any 'benefits'
>that prove to me (and f.i. my $workjob manager) that implementing DMARC
>is actually useful. A lower doorstep would be nice.
>
>Note that I don't intend to cripple the feedback concept or DMARC in
>general, but just interested in any opinions on this.
>
>Kind regards,
>       Tom
>_______________________________________________
>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)


_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to