On Apr 29, 2013, at 11:09 AM, John Sweet <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks, John and Tim. > > To my mind, this doesn't create a privacy problem any different from > the existing ones around spam filtering, DLP, or NDRs: somebody in an > administrative position may end up looking at message contents. You > have to build well-understood processes and privileges around it, so > you can warn and/or make promises to your users accordingly. It's just > the newest thing to do that. > > What I find puzzling about the Google Apps DMARC page is that it seems > to actively discourage use of the ruf= tag under any circumstances. I > suppose it's easier to say, "we don't support it," than, "using this > can have all kinds of unpleasant consequences, so use only with > extreme caution, and only after you fully understand what they are." > Well the DMARC FAQ also recommend to not put a ruf= in your record until you know what you are doing. Especially until you have an estimate of how many failure reports you may get. _______________________________________________ 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)
