On Sun, 2014-06-08 at 10:52 -0500, Al Iverson via dmarc-discuss wrote: > On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 12:22 AM, David Woodhouse via dmarc-discuss > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Any bank *not* signing its direct-to-customer email should be prosecuted > > as an accessory to fraud which it is enabling by actively training its > > customers to succumb to phishing :) > > Since none of them do sign their mail with S/MIME today, will you be > leading that prosecutorial effort personally? What kind of lawyers do > you have lined up for the effort?
Oh, I'll probably use the same people I use when I say "these people should be shot for being so stupid". -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ 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)
