This to me represent an evolution of a framework for dealing with 'spam'. Why?
because the now the addition of consent as an element in the 'anti-spam'
architecture is (to me) more workable. The universe of systems needing consent
may be reduced by RMX and that may allow consent proposals to be more precise.
-e
On Tuesday, May 06, 2003 5:27 PM, Alan DeKok
[SMTP:aland(_at_)freeradius(_dot_)org] wrote:
In keeping with the charter of this group, I will now discuss
consent. Within the context of SMTP, RMX allows the originating
domain and MTA do explicitely publish their consentual relationship.
In this case, if envelope sender re-writing is done, we can use RMX to
establish that the domain 'example.com' consented to have that
particular MTA send an email with a body "from" of 'example-2.com'.
In this case, the answers to questions 1 and 2 stay the same. The
answer to question 3 now becomes an explicit "yes, consent exists."
The answer to question 4 becomes "the originating MTA is not an open
relay or 'owned' machine, unless the attacker has additionally taken
over the DNS records."
So the solution to .forward files, is to have the forwarding MTA
explicitely declare it's consent to forwarding messages for another
domain.
In contrast, the simple act of forwarding messages tells you
nothing about consent, other than that forwarding is occuring.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg