Hello, On Sat, 2019-01-26 at 10:36 -0500, John Levine wrote: > In article <[email protected]> you > write: > > What are the privacy concerns in this simple scenario that speak against > > sending a DMARC/DKIM report to sending server, > > telling that the DKIM validation fails? > > The person reading the DMARC reports had enough authority to put a > record in the DNS, but that is not the same thing as being able to > read all of the users' mail. > > In large mail systems, different staff have different roles, and very > few of them can look at users' mail.
Aha, we have staff dealing with DNS, staff dealing with email boxes and domain owners. How can a domain owner communicate, that its users agree to have investigations on forensic reports, where DKIM signatures failed (fot the purpose of avoiding repeating errors in DKIM signing/validation)? In particular, that there is no expectation of the users that a deleted message is erased and that the domain owner, DNS staff and email staff function good as whole? Regards Дилян _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
