ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

[ietf-dkim] Relaxed always (was: user level ssp)

2006-09-11 19:09:10
Douglas Otis wrote:

1) I always sign, but I also know that I send email through
   relays that will break the signature.  If you, as a
   receiver, reject legitimate email due to broken/missing
   signatures, it is your fault and I'll place the blame on
   you.
[...]
In theory, a receiver of case 1) signing can use the "I sign
all" information, along with other information the receiver
knows about the source of the email (is it a known mailing
list? etc.) to make a reasonable guess about whether a
broken/missing signature is a good spam indicator or not.
[...]
defining these states should probably exclude who is at
blame for mail accepted or blocked.

+1  Receivers might not know some mailing-lists, consider known
lists as bad, etc.  For receivers with an empty white-list case
1 and 2 are very similar.  And rejecting is better than "tag as
suspicious" (which in essence means "let the users delete this
unread")

Not damaging signatures at the MDA would be most important

A wannabe-MDA damaging signatures, stripping header fields, or
not reporting the Return-Path is IMHO a gateway to lala-land.

Frank


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html