When studying indirect mail, I noticed that some forwarders change SPF, some do not. Some organizations add auth result data and some do not. Some mailing lists are real and some are gimmicks to distribute spam. The only way to evaluate correctly is to have a profile for each indirect flow.
Does not scale? yes. Necessary anyway? Yes Doug On Fri, Oct 25, 2024, 1:23 PM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri 25/Oct/2024 19:14:15 +0200 John R Levine wrote: > >> On Fri 25/Oct/2024 17:51:47 +0200 John R Levine wrote: > >>>> That way a receiver has to manage a list of forwarding recipes for > each user. > >>> > >>> Surely it is obvious why this sort of thing does not scale. > >> > >> Beg your pardon, but it's not obvious to me. It should be a small > number, > >> I'd guess less than a few hundreds, less than 10 on average. If older > spam > >> filters could manage it, why wouldn't it scale for an ARC filter? > > > > Some mail systems have a billion users, most of whom are not technically > > sophisticated, and too many of whom are spammers trying to trick the > reputation > > system. > > > A system handling billion users must be pretty fat. They handle flags, > IMAP > keywords, web mail preferences, address books and who knows what else. > Handling subscriptions is just another file. > > I agree that the interface for asking to confirm subscriptions must be > quite > hard to design. However, users who subscribe to mailing list or set up > forwarding must have a minimal degree of sophistication. > > Confirming a subscription only affects that user's mailbox. No games. > > > Best > Ale > -- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
