-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> I have now processed the Abusix data for last Wednesday (which might >> well be a typical day) >> >> Date scanned : 20260528 >> >> JSON records processed: 24478574 >> X-Spam-Status present : 683 >> X-Spam-Score present : 544 >> Either present : 718 >> Both present : 509 >> >> 718 is 0.002933% of the day's traffic (one message, one JSON record) >> >> This is not "routinely". Perhaps we could move on.
In message <[email protected]>, Vittorio <[email protected]> writes >Richard, X-Spam-Status and X-Spam-Score were examples of a class, not >the complete threat model. I cannot search my data for a class to determine whether your concerns have any merit ... and if you keep on changing the goalposts it is impossible to refute what appears to be just speculation as to what spammers "routinely" do to fool authentication systems >You have not addressed the Google Groups >point: Google signs X-Original-Sender in its h= tags in production. The >question remains open. I expect Google Groups to adopt DKIM2 sooner than many sites. Doubtless they will pay attention to what header fields they place into their messages as they do that. - -- richard @ highwayman . com "Nothing seems the same Still you never see the change from day to day And no-one notices the customs slip away" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBaiFc2WHfC/FfW545EQKdyQCdFjHU08Gqy2y0c6uw89j9/7xLCIUAn2Jf 3GA08E6+Cp0pBoFWb5umVhbT =5KL7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
