On 2/10/23 10:23 AM, Wei Chuang wrote:
Hi all,
I've posted an updated version of the
draft-chuang-dkim-replay-problem-01
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chuang-dkim-replay-problem/01/>
draft. It cleans up a lot from the -00 rough draft state so hopefully
it's more clear. It builds a case that spammers are exploiting DKIM
through replay, identifies conflicting scenarios, and outlines a
solution space.
-Wei
PS Many, many thanks goes to Dave Crocker for his editorial advice.
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
| When large amounts of spam are received by the mailbox provider, the
| operator’s filtering engine will eventually react by dropping the
| reputation of the original DKIM signer.
I think this needs some amount of justification. It's really easy to
hand wave this and it's certainly a common assumption, but it's not a
given. What exactly does "dropping the reputation" actually mean in
practice? Does it mean for certain senders, certain classes of senders,
the whole sending domain? How are such drops weighted? What are
plausible metrics the receiver might use? One mailbox sending a lot of
spam but otherwise the sending domain seems to be behaving well, seems
pretty relevant to the topic.
This is especially true if a BCP gets written here. The problem
statement should be as specific as it can be about why it's hard for
receivers to overcome this problem. If there's a lot of proprietary
stuff that can't be talked about, then it's pretty impossible to put
together a BCP since we collectively have no idea what those practices are.
I think this really goes to the heart of what's going on here.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
