To Murray's observation about fairness, my thoughts: 1) Life is not fair.
2) As others have observed, the mailing list problem is exclusively an evaluator error. An evaluator's job is to allow safe and wanted messages while blocking unsafe or unwanted messages. 3) The problem can be solved by senders not asserting reject, by lists rewriting From, or by evaluators using more than DMARC Fail alone. Our document should address all three. The only one that is guaranteed to provide delivery under all sender-evaluator combinations will be From rewrite. Doug Foster On Sun, Jul 9, 2023, 1:14 AM Murray S. Kucherawy <superu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 6:14 AM Douglas Foster < > dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Malicious impersonation creates a need for authentication. If the list >> makes changes that disable the originator's authentication, then it is the >> list's problem to find a way to convince the recipient that the message is >> not a malicious impersonation. ARC and Munging together are the best >> available way to do so, because no other options are on the table. >> > > I continue to disagree with this line of thinking. Lists have been > behaving a particular way, with important operational benefits to users > (unrelated to authentication), for a very long time. That they should > suddenly be told by senders that the Internet works a different way > starting now and those behaviors are wrong and must be fixed, to me, defies > reason. > > If you want to blame someone for the list problem, blame the criminals. >> > > Here, we agree. > > -MSK, participating >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
