On 6/25/2020 3:14 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Frequently, an inbound message has one or more valid DKIM signatures,
and/or passes SPF, yet it fails DMARC; that is, the authenticated
domain(s) are not aligned with From:. Now it's obvious that any of
those authenticated domain(s) could as well have set a Sender:
pointing to itself. Hence, the net effect is equivalent to dropping
the alignment requirement.
It's not. Remember that the From: field is typically also the Sender:
field.
Again: The actual semantics of DMARC have to do with the organization's
domain, not the author's mailbox. So, really, DMARC concerns an
operational identifier, not a content creator.
The suggestion, therefore, is to retain alignment, but move it to a
field that has to do with operations, not content.
Sender: has a display name and an address, just like From:. Don't we
risk to double phishing opportunities?
If Sender: and From: domains disagree, are both going to get reports?
Why would there be a DMARC report on From:?
Reports are supposed to be consumed by the originator.
You didn't actually answer my question.
Let's try a more complete question:
If DMARC reports refer to the Sender: aligned domain, and reports
refer to that, why is a report on the From: field also required?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
