On Mar 29, 2013, at 7:07 PM, J. Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I do have users that send regular email, and I'm now seeing little > incentive to implement DMARC processing in my systems. First, because I > cannot get full advantage out of it without nasty side effects, and second > because I cannot be sure that other people implementing DMARC are fully aware > of it's implications. > > Regards, > > J. Gomez
There is a missing element here, which "emergency preparedness". Maintaining DMARC-compliant email streams means being able to move immediately from "p=none" to "p=reject" when/if you become target of a phishing attack. Although running full-time at "p=reject" might incur too much collateral damage due to human using mailing lists, being able to turn the shields on immediately is gold. Making changes while the alarms are going off is no fun. HTH, =- Tim _______________________________________________ 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)
