Dnia 15.01.2024 o godz. 08:07:28 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop pisze: > A better solution would otherwise to make a BIMI extension to SMIME in > that case, that will override the server BIMI in SMIME signed emails. > Where the BIMI logo becomes part of the SMIME certificate by an > non-critical extension. (SHA512 hash + URL of BIMI logo)
That's probably the best idea, because BIMI will then become simply an additional feature to something that is actually useful (S/MIME certificate). This may also promote use of S/MIME for actual end-to-end email authentication, which undoubtedly *is* the most reliable from of email authentication, but is very rarely used today. Going through all this process you have described just to get a BIMI-validated logo seems still a waste of time and effort for me. We return here to the original question: what is the actual added value that BIMI gives? For me it looks like a typical case of "solving a problem one has first created themselves", ie. first we create another artificial barrier of entry for someone wanting to operate own email server, that by itself gives little to zero added value (the value does not justify the effort needed to set it up), and then we try to find a solution to make that barrier of entry "lower" and less obtrusive. Instead of returning again and again to the question, is this barrier of entry actually needed at all? And a final remark regarding your draft: believe it or not, but there *are* people in the world who want to run their own mail server, but do not use - and do not want to use - smartphones. So, no NFC or QR code scanning. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa [email protected] -- "In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub." _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
