On Wed 16/Aug/2023 19:48:30 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 10:25 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Wed 16/Aug/2023 15:26:43 +0200 Laura Atkins wrote:
On 16 Aug 2023, at 12:59, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Wed 16/Aug/2023 11:17:50 +0200 Laura Atkins wrote:
On 16 Aug 202
On Wed 16/Aug/2023 20:19:44 +0200 Dave Crocker wrote:
On 8/16/2023 10:48 AM, Murray^W Ale wrote:
Yet, an open
signer is for DKIM the equivalent of what an open relay is for SPF.
It is nothing of the sort.
Open relays perform a relaying function, which actively moves mail, where the
abuse is
On Thu 17/Aug/2023 04:45:48 +0200 Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, at 21:36, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Tue 15/Aug/2023 08:10:23 +0200 Bron Gondwana wrote:
We've love to not sign spam at all, but short of never allowing users to send email, it's
not actually possible. We're not tr
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> > I'm not convinced advice is necessary here. Do you really need signs in
> > banks that say "Don't put your signature on random financial
> documents"? I
> > have to believe that people understand what it means to sign something,
> and
Alessandro Vesely wrote in
<652789f7-0a0a-f8db-11f9-2558bc9ec...@tana.it>:
|On Thu 17/Aug/2023 04:45:48 +0200 Bron Gondwana wrote:
|> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, at 21:36, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
|>> On Tue 15/Aug/2023 08:10:23 +0200 Bron Gondwana wrote:
|>>> We've love to not sign spam at all, but
On Thu 17/Aug/2023 18:21:35 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
I'm not convinced advice is necessary here. Do you really need signs in
banks that say "Don't put your signature on random financial documents"? I
have to believe that peopl
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 2:06 PM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Thu 17/Aug/2023 18:21:35 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:30 AM Alessandro Vesely
> wrote:
> >
> >>> I'm not convinced advice is necessary here. Do you really need signs
> in
> >>> banks that say "Don't
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> More, usually (it happened in the past) they then point to their
> web site, where you then *do*, and isn't the certificate of that
> website, which itself is likely verified by some CA in some CA
> pool that you do not have control over,
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023, at 5:30 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> When domain authentication arrived, they considered that /all/ messages from
> their domain must be authenticated.
Some receivers only send FBLs if the messages are DKIM=pass. So, the
responsible thing to do is for a MBP/ESP to sign e
