On Jun 5, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy via dmarc-discuss 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Les Barstow via dmarc-discuss 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree - DMARC does not protect against the From description. But if the MUA 
> were to display the full From header rather than the description only, we 
> might be getting somewhere.
> 
> The rest of your response backs up my point; the will to get this done 
> "right" in a broader sense does not exist and we're left with ineffective 
> band-aids and holes large enough to drive a truck full of phish through.
> 
> +1.  Any comprehensive solution to this cluster of problems requires that the 
> discussion cover everything from the IP layer all the way up through layer 9, 
> and not punt on any of it.  That obviously exceeds the scope of anything 
> we've tried before, but that doesn't change this ultimate requirement.
> 

As pointed to me, this could be a Wicked Problem: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem and be approached as such which is 
not the type of problem engineers may handle well.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
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