Vincent Lefevre via Postfix-users wrote in <20241023083724.ga782...@qaa.vinc17.org>: |On 2024-10-22 10:20:55 -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: |> Vincent Lefevre via Postfix-users: |>> As DMARC protection, some mailing-lists (like postfix-users) |>> rewrite the "From:" header, with at least 2 drawbacks: ... |On 2024-10-23 00:35:54 +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote: ... |> That is what Author: is meant for btw. ... |> In general it is surely only a user interface question if Author: |> would finally be adopted. | |Probably not a user interface issue. If mail client starts showing |the "Author:" address instead of "From:", DMARC/SPF would probably |evolve to also ban a different domain in "Author:" to protect the |recipient against domain spoofing. :-(
Not instead but .. whatever. Author was invented in particular to make this blown up system at least a little bit better. Even better would be a total reduction with only DKIM in *my* opinion, as i see it like TLS, and there you do not even get a connection if the handshake fails, so if it were me you would simply get a bounce if no valid DKIM signature is found (and a DNS entry announces one is to be expected .. which could even be done via the yet existing DMARC stuff). That is to say, quoting Dave Crocker of IETF/email+, "then it is a new message". That is, the mailing-list forcefully breaks the old, and creates a new signature of a new message (if it does), that cannot be helped. But Author "would still indicate the truth", not a messable Reply-To:. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) _______________________________________________ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
