On 12/6/20 10:45 AM, Douglas Foster wrote:
The recent discussion has introduced two challenges to ARC:  first, that it is too complicated, and second, that it opens up security holes that should be unacceptable.    John's response appears to be that the technology will only be used by a small group of lists in cooperation with a small group of recipients, that the complexity will be a non-issue for the participants and the risk, while present, will be mitigated by the limited scope of participation.    All of this is problematic.

On security issues, we have to assume attacks by state-sponsored actors, not just fortune seekers.   So the security challenge needs to be thoroughly vetted.

But the participation assumption is even more worrisome. If this is a limited participation protocol, supported by a private but not-yet-created communication network, then it does not solve the chair's requirement for a general solution.

Indeed, I wonder if ietf.org would meet that criteria for "small group of lists".


I ask the chairs to formally endorse development of an alternative to ARC as an additional approach to the mailing list problem, a solution based on reverse transformation.  Alessandro and Murray have submitted drafts.   It is time to study their proposals and merge their work.


Based on the work I did at Cisco 15 years ago which essentially was a heuristic based form of those two drafts, I found that it worked for about 90 some percent. I unfortunately do not know what the nature of the remaining messages that could not be recovered (either I never did the analysis or don't remember). Things may have changed some since then, but that was what we got for the entire mail stream of a large company. Is that "good enough"? Or better yet, what is the definition of "good enough"?

That's probably the most important question out of all of this: what is the success criteria? Our success criteria was that we wanted to mark up messages that were possible spear phishing, so the success criteria was some given false positive rate, with whitelists to mop up some of the corner cases. But that was a very enterprise-y criteria. The larger success criteria needs to encompass a far larger set of use cases.

Mike

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

Reply via email to