https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2024/240502.pdf
This was released this past week by the FBI. Although we are in last call,
I have to wonder if a) the attack itself, and/or b) the government
recommendations regarding policy might impact DMARCbis in any manner. I've
only just started thinking about t
On 5/7/2024 7:00 PM, Dotzero wrote:
https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2024/240502.pdf
This was released this past week by the FBI. Although we are in last
call, I have to wonder if a) the attack itself, and/or b) the
government recommendations regarding policy might impact DMARCbis in
any manne
On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 9:09:02 PM EDT Mark Alley wrote:
> On 5/7/2024 7:00 PM, Dotzero wrote:
> > https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2024/240502.pdf
> >
> > This was released this past week by the FBI. Although we are in last
> > call, I have to wonder if a) the attack itself, and/or b) the
> > gover
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 9:27 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 7, 2024 9:09:02 PM EDT Mark Alley wrote:
> > On 5/7/2024 7:00 PM, Dotzero wrote:
> > > https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2024/240502.pdf
> > >
> > > This was released this past week by the FBI. Although we are in last
> > > call
It appears that Scott Kitterman said:
>> Addressing this issue - perusing Section 5.5.6, is there anything else
>> we could add that would be acceptable language in an Standards track
>> document to encourage urgency behind a transitory state of p=none use by
>> domain owners? Would that even mak
