Wietse Venema wrote:
What was the advantage of SSP with look-alike domains?
To find large unproductive ratholes? Neither DKIM or SSP claim to have
any direct effect on look-alike domain names, and there's nothing in our
DKIM_BASE allows a recipient to distinguish mail from the bank from
look-alike mail that pretends to be from the bank. That information
comes in the form of the signing domain.
SSP has an advantage when we assume that criminals are stupid enough
to keep sending forged mail. It has no advantage with look-alike
attacks. Guess what criminals will do.
Without SSP, users have two opportunities for making mistakes in
verifying their mail. They can fail to notice that it is unsigned,
or they can fail to notice that it is from a wrong domain.
With SSP, users only have to look for the wrong domain, because
they should never see the unsigned mail.
Maybe someone who's an expert in human factors can relate this to
statistical decrease in errors by the user. My feeling is that
the less a user has to worry about, the more likely they are going
to successfully examine their message and determine it's origin.
tom
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html