It seems to me that validating a mailing list delivery the transaction would go
something like:
mail from: thelistsoftware(_at_)domain(_dot_)name
rcpt to: thelistrecipient(_at_)otherdomain(_dot_)name
the from may very well say:
From: somelistposter(_at_)stillanotherdomain(_dot_)name
To: thelist(_at_)domain(_dot_)name,
someotherposter(_at_)quitealongdomain(_dot_)name
Cc: me(_at_)mydomain(_dot_)name
[content]
Where RMX does its check (mail-from) the 'tests' would not fail, ie. the list
software is valid for originating mail from
thelistsoftware(_at_)domain(_dot_)name(_dot_) I do
see your point with further checks on the message content headers, but it does
not appear that the RMX check (as currently proposed) would fail in that
regard. Further, if the list software were to deliver with the following
envelope:
mail from: somelistposter(_at_)stillanotherdomain(_dot_)name
rcpt to: thelistrecipient(_at_)otherdomain(_dot_)name
The RMX check would fail appropriately, as the delivering system (the list
system) is/would not be allowed to envelope a message using that information.
Where you state the MUA may do header re-writing to some effect e.g. adding a
sender line for example Sender:
somelistposter(_at_)stillanotherdomain(_dot_)name(_dot_) That
would be appropriate however, if the line were Sender:
thelistsoftware(_at_)domain(_dot_)name, while not inaccurate may lead to
end-user 'issues'
with determining an appropriate originator (though not an inaccurate
originator).
It seems to me that is an implementation issue in two places, a) with the list
software developer - "am I friendly to RMX capable MTAs" and b) the MUA
developer - "does my MUA support header rewriting in a way friendly to list
software"; there may be a third issue with MTA header re-writing (in the first
case), but IMHO that is not an MUA issue except where it intersects with
end-user/UI usability (read expected behavior) issues. Also, I don't think RMX
considers (in-depth) header rewriting because the FSM of RMX is not involved
directly in that process.
-e
On Tuesday, May 13, 2003 5:49 AM, william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
[SMTP:william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net]
wrote:
You'v already answered your own question. The client/end-user mail reader
is adding "Sender:" header to the email, that is not a proper behavior,
the sender should be added by sending MUA or MTA. ...
8<...>8
The problem is that if you were using "From:" header for RMX validation
you would as in example below see "william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net" but actual
message
came from "ietf.org" server and so the mail would not be validated and
would fail RMX. Using "Sender:" headeris also not possible since "Sender:"
could have been set by by MUA (mine is configured not to do that) and then
there are different maillist programs and majority will actually not set
"Sender" or will not reset it to themselve if header already exists
(some will add 2nd "Sender:" header, but this is rare and considered a bug,
though I think RFC2828 does not explicitly forbid this), so again it fails
with mail lists. This leaves MAIL FROM to be used for RMX validation and
this is what all current RMX-like drafts propose. But as you quite well
illustrated the MAIL FROM is not even seen by end-users and it means
spammer can use one domain for MAIL-FROM (which would random domain
without any RMX record) and use another domain for "From:" and most users
will still consider email as having come from the listed "From:" address.
And as for the "Sender:" header, spammers quite often set that as well.
On Tue, 13 May 2003, Tom Thomson wrote:
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net wrote on 09 May 2003 at 06:06
...
I've appended below the email headers that Outlook reports for the message
to which I am replying. If you think any of these is not correct (ie
Outloook has got it wrong) please let me know and I'll take it up with M$.
If you don't think any of it is wrong, perhaps you'll not make silly
accusations about Outlook in future.
...
Received: from www1.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by mail.neosinteractive.com
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329);
Fri, 9 May 2003 13:29:26 +0100
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4982I811640;
Fri, 9 May 2003 04:02:18 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h497xr811361
for <asrg(_at_)optimus(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>; Fri, 9 May 2003 03:59:53
-0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08152
for <asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; Fri, 9 May 2003 03:49:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19E2fG-0002N4-00
for asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Fri, 09 May 2003 03:51:34 -0400
Received: from sokol.elan.net ([216.151.192.200])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19E2fF-0002N1-00
for asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Fri, 09 May 2003 03:51:33 -0400
Received: from sokol.elan.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by sokol.elan.net (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h495627W017107
for <asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 22:06:02 -0700
Received: from localhost (william(_at_)localhost)
by sokol.elan.net (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) with ESMTP id h49562ML017103
for <asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; Thu, 8 May 2003 22:06:02 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: sokol.elan.net: william owned process doing -bs
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: RMX evaluation / Paul Vixie's procedure
In-Reply-To: <200305090131(_dot_)33356(_at_)grx>
Message-ID:
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0305082050400(_dot_)1089-100000(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Errors-To: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
X-BeenThere: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>,
<mailto:asrg-request(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>,
<mailto:asrg-request(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 22:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 May 2003 12:29:26.0747 (UTC)
FILETIME=[A15052B0:01C31626]
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg