That last sentence is basically what I said about both of my drafts, and
that logic was shot down. Once you've decided you don't like the arbitrary
changes, you know who to blame, but you still have to decide what you like
and what you don't.
Yeah, now that I look at your drafts again, I see
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rolf E.
Sonneveld
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 10:17 AM
To: Anne Bennett; dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Updated mandatory tag/conditional signature draft
On 04/09/2015 03:24 PM, Anne Bennett
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 7:06 PM, John Levine jo...@taugh.com wrote:
It seems to me that this addresses the same issues that the list
mutation stuff does with a lot less complication, and without having
to enumerate all of the ways that a list might change the message. It
only assumes that the
On 4/9/2015 10:17 AM, Rolf E. Sonneveld wrote:
On 04/09/2015 03:24 PM, Anne Bennett wrote:
Hector Santos hsan...@isdg.net writes:
A database is still needed of which domains will have an
outbound mail stream with two signatures. Some how the list domains
will still need to register with the
On 04/09/2015 04:51 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rolf E.
Sonneveld
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 10:17 AM
To: Anne Bennett; dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Updated mandatory tag/conditional
A database is still needed of which domains will have an
outbound mail stream with two signatures.
Sorry, no, that's completely wrong. Please reread the draft.
I have not yet taken the time to fully understand the weak and
strong signatures idea, but if I may be forgiven for commenting
Fairly simple? I'm not sure about that.
1) The signer engine needs to do two signatures now. This will be a
major code change, more outbound signing overhead. There is still that
so called scalability, big data problem. How will the YAHOOs
scale this? A database is still needed of which
For anybody who will be attending the RSA Conference in San Francisco
about a week and a half from today, there's at least one panel focused
on DMARC:
Curbing Email Threats Spearphishing– The Promise Results with
DMARC
Wednesday, April 22nd, 10:20 - 11:10AM, West, Room 2018
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:25 AM, John Levine jo...@taugh.com wrote:
Yeah, now that I look at your drafts again, I see that we are both
making the same assertion that this message is a mutated version of
one that someone else sent. I still like mine better because trying
to enumerate all of
This can be solved by having the owners of mailing lists publish a
yet-to-be-defined DNS record in which they proclaim the presence of a
mailing list within that domain.
That's unlikely to work, because malicious people can publish anything
that legitimate lists can.
There's a fundamental rule
On 04/09/2015 03:24 PM, Anne Bennett wrote:
Hector Santos hsan...@isdg.net writes:
A database is still needed of which domains will have an
outbound mail stream with two signatures. Some how the list domains
will still need to register with the Yahoos and tell the Yahoos,
Please send us two
11 matches
Mail list logo
