-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 3:06 PM
To: DKIM List
Subject: [ietf-dkim] ADSP stats
I crunched all the signed mail I've gotten since the beginning of 2010:
[...]
I seem to recall sending this out, but maybe it wasn't to this list because I
can't find it in my "ietf-dkim" mailbox. Apologies if this is a duplicate.
Here's what OpenDKIM has for ADSP statistics. To set context, OpenDKIM always
checks ADSP when there's no valid author domain signature, but doesn't act on
it by default. That means if someone posts an ADSP policy and there was a
valid author signature, it won't be included in the numbers marked [*] because
we don't do the query in that case.
Messages reported: 13.3M since August 30, 2010
Distinct From: domains observed: 490276
Domains for which an ADSP query returned anything at all [*]: 71460
(14.6%)
Domains for which an ADSP of "unknown" was found [*]: 313 (0.06%)
Domains for which an ADSP of "all" was found [*]: 272 (0.05%)
Domains for which an ADSP of "discardable" was found [*]: 42 (0.009%)
Of those 42 discardable ones, 13 were PayPal variants. Interestingly, SwissCom
was another.
You can tell from this that the vast majority of what our ADSP queries hit is
wildcard TXT records referencing something other than an ADSP record (probably
SPF).
I can break it down by month if anyone's interested in trend data, but the
numbers are so small in the first place that I doubt it'd be very interesting.
So we can't tell how widely ADSP has been deployed because we don't check in
the positive case, but we can see how it looks in the negative case: It's
successfully "protecting" 0.13% of the domains out there.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html