Am 01.04.21 um 16:36 schrieb Marcel Becker via mailop:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 12:43 AM Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>
>     One option that you should consider to mitigate the effects for 
> recipients is to allow per-recipient DMARC
>     exceptions, because the recipient is the one who ultimately decides 
> whether mail is wanted or unwanted.
>
>
> Recipients are the ones least able to make a decision whether a mail claiming 
> to be from brand.com <http://brand.com>
> was really sent from brand.com <http://brand.com>. They don't even know that 
> a mail from lookslikebrand.com
> <http://lookslikebrand.com> is not legit, move it out of the spam folder and 
> then proceed to interact with it...
>
>  

Although this is often correct, it's a dangerous attitude. We might know a lot 
of technical things better than our
users, but at the end of the day we're the ones providing a service to the 
users, fulfilling their needs, not the other
way around. We're feel we know better what's good for them, and in single 
instances we're most often right, but when we
bake our knowledge into mail system policies we're quite often wrong. There are 
some legitimate areas where protection
against malicious attacks is justified, but interestingly, many really 
dangerous attacks would use squeaky clean SPF
records, DKIM signatures and DMARC policies.

And I wasn't talking about the stupid phishing victims who insist on pulling 
out spams out of the spam folder and click
on links because they believe their bank is requesting them to fix some 
password issue, but about sane people who
subscribe to mailing lists, forward their mail from one mailbox to another, 
etc. Although we might rightfully say that
this is so 1990's, it's what our users use to gain real value from using e-mail.

Cheers,
Hans-Martin

_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Reply via email to