On Sep 7, 2006, at 12:54 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
On Sep 7, 2006, at 12:28 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of John Levine
Mostly +1
But there could be utility in the sender saying 'My email
is at very
serious risk of being impersonated'.
What is that utility? Please expand on what behaviour you
expect from the recipient and how that will differ from the
case where the sender does not say that.
If I know that you are a self declared target of phishing and that
the consequences of letting a phish go through are considerably
more serious than a random impersonation spam I can adjust my spam
filters accordingly.
In particular I would expect to filter out ALL mail automatically
in the case that ALL the following apply:
* The sender ALWAYS signs
* The sender declares themselves to be at risk of phishing attack
* The content is HTML
* There are URIs in the body of the text message
* The message has not been forwarded by a previously noted
intermediary.
How does that differ from the case where:
* The sender ALWAYS signs
* The content is HTML
* There are URIs in the body of the text message
* The message has not been forwarded by a previously noted
intermediary.
I guess that the real question is what's the difference between "I
always sign"
and "I always sign and I get phished"?
The impression I'm getting, from several people, is that "I always
sign" is already
being written off as likely to be ignored by recipients and that
there needs to be
a "No, I really mean it!" modifier?
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html