----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Atkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "DKIM List" <[email protected]>
> Even when it decreases overall deliverability? That is to say, causes > legitimate email to be treated as forgeries and, likely, discarded. The fraudulent mail covered are for 0% FALSE POSTIVES. Absolutely No FUZZY LOGIC. If it was fuzzy, I personally wouldn't wasting my time anymore here. > I can see cases where that's going to be an appropriate tradeoff, but > I don't think they're as widespread as some people think. The last time someone doubted the potential for fraudulent mail: From RFC 2821 7.1 Mail Security and Spoofing ... This specification does not further address the authentication issues associated with SMTP other than to advocate that useful functionality not be disabled in the hope of providing some small margin of protection against an ignorant user who is trying to fake mail. that "ignorant user" turned into a world-wide multi-billion industry powerhouse. The SSP is about the 100% detection with 0% false positive of the most obvious of fraudulent mail, the ones that the unprotected DKIM-BASE protocol leaves hanging in the wind to be easily exploited. -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
