On 9/2/10 11:23 AM, Rolf E. Sonneveld wrote:
>    Hi, Murray,
>
> On 09/02/2010 07:42 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 02, 2010 10:35 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>>>
>>> However, the other issue is to break or remove author domain
>>> signatures.  John has pointed this out since a long time, for FBL
>>> reasons.  Doug has brought out the same issue for replaying attacks
>>> aimed at breaking reputation, because replaying is definitely out of
>>> control in case of publicly distributed messages.
>> What's the danger of replaying legitimate mail, other than to cause volume 
>> detection alarms to go off?
> I think Doug was not talking about replaying legitimate mail but illegit
> mail. I believe Doug described this scenario in one of his previous
> messages either on domainrep or here on this list (Doug, excuse me if
> this summary lacks the nuances):
>
> Someone sends a spam-type message from a large ESP to a mailbox he owns,
> somewhere on the Internet. The message is DKIM signed by the ESP. The
> spammer then takes the entire message including complete headers, and
> replays it using different envelope To: addresses and (optionally)
> different envelope From addresses. A verifier find the signature to be
> valid and at the end of the day this type of replay will impact the
> reputation of the ESP.
Rolf,

You're close.  Bad-actors can't use different From header fields, 
because this field MUST be signed.   Also, they'll likely have a 
collection of messages to send en masse within a short period before 
exploiting different accounts.  To defend against this problem, ESP 
could utilize one of their subdomains to sign their messages, and assert 
ADSP dkim=tpa-path for their domains used to exchange email.

For those that implement ADSP, they would see less spam, and the 
TPA-Label would also allow providers a means to stipulate which sources 
they authorize to replay their message.  In addition, the TPA-Label also 
stipulates how SMTP clients are to be authenticated prior to acceptance, 
to make this easier for recipients.  This should also offer ESPs a level 
of protection from lax reputation services that fail to authenticate the 
domains being assessed.

-Doug

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to