ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1525 -- Clarification about posting by first Author

2008-01-16 23:40:49
John L wrote:
Just to make sure I don't misunderstand anything, let's assume that visasecurity.net doesn't publish any SSP, either because it doesn't exist (its current state) or it's registered as a throwawy by someone who doesn't publish any DNS records.

Then these headers are SSP compliant and not Suspicious, regardless of anything that paypal.com publishes, right?

From: visasecurity.net (Visa Security), security(_at_)paypal(_dot_)com (Paypal Security)
 Sender: anyone(_at_)anywhere(_dot_)org
 Subject: An Urgent Message from Your Friends at Paypal and Visa

(assuming you mean security(_at_)visasecurity(_dot_)net instead of just visasecurity.net)

If visasecurity.net does not exist, the message is not SSP compliant (is Suspicious) because it fails the domain existence test.

But yes, if it is registered as a throwaway and doesn't publish SSP, it will be SSP compliant (not Suspicious), presuming some DNS record for the domain exists (at least an NS record or something). Hopefully Visa has engaged the use of a domain registration monitoring service to protect against this.

-Jim

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>