I support an initiative to validate other parts of the mail message, to inhibit 
the ability of criminal actors to spoof recipients.   The topics that I think 
need attention include:
Control untrusted content in the Friendly Name.   As suggested, a mechanism is 
needed to hide or remove untrusted Friendly Names.  This seems to require a way 
to sign the message with and without the Friendly Name included, as well as 
methods to configure policy defintions for Friendly Name trust.

Obstruct hijacking of corporate logos.   Existing work with Digital Rights 
Identifiers seems to be the starting point for this effort.

Validate routing paths and detect suspicious routes.    ARC seems to provide 
this opportunity.    Currently, any Received header, prior to the first one, 
cannot be fully trusted, because it might be spoofed.   This is a source of 
concern even if criminals are not yet spoofing this content.    ARC provides 
the opportunity to distinguish verified Received headers from unverified ones.  
 The potential benefits of this information for spam filtering are not yet 
clear, but I believe those opportunities will become evident in the future.

Embrace multiple authorship.   We need to provide spam filters, mailing lists, 
and other intermediaries with the ability to add signed content without 
destroying existing signatures,.  This will require MUAs that understand the 
multiple authors and can use that knowledge to display the content of different 
authors with appropriate identifying information.  It will also require 
supporting protocols to allow incoming gateways and individual users with the 
ability to control whether an addition is trusted and visible or untrusted and 
hidden.
These initiatives will add complexity to the email evaluation process.   We 
know that anything which adds complexity will also create risk that email 
gateways will become confused and therefore vulnerable.    These initiatives 
must be carefully vetted to avoid creating new attack methods.   The criminals 
seem to have more imagination than the rest of us, so attack methods can be 
difficult to predict.

Doug Foster

----------------------------------------
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]>
Sent: 7/25/20 9:49 AM
To: Dotzero <[email protected]>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: Agenda requests for Madrid IETF
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:05 PM Dotzero <[email protected]> wrote:
I would like to see an agenda item as to whether work around "Display Name" 
changes are in scope or out of scope for this effort and this working group. It 
would seem to me that any such efforts are more appropriate for the emailcore 
working group.

A quick read of the current charters suggests to me that it's in scope for 
neither.  That seems to be especially true for emailcore.

Do you have such a change to propose?

-MSK


_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to