I also strongly support this initiative. I really like what I've seen of
the work on this so far; it's clear a lot of thought has been put into this
design, and I want to express my appreciation to Wei, Bron, and Richard for
their efforts on this - as well as anyone else who's contributed. My
inte
Regardless of the specific words we may use to describe it, I've seen some
very large email platforms omit some important headers in their DKIM
signatures - headers explicitly recommended by the DKIM RFC - and I've seen
that absence enable real-world abuse. Based on samples from multiple
senders o
On Sat, Apr 12, 2025 at 12:45 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> Out in the real world, the problem is caused by lack of adequate
> controls over users, on some platforms.
Consider an outbound email spam filtering system that's 99.9% accurate.
Under normal circumstances, that's good performance. Under
ntext of DKIM replay.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 9:08 PM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 4/14/2025 11:41 PM, Burke, Evan wrote:
>
> Regardless of the specific words we may use to describe it, I've seen some
> very large email platforms omit some important headers in their DKIM
> signat
1:1 abusive mail flows are not particularly common, but they do currently
exist, and will continue to exist, regardless of whether they are direct or
indirect mail flows. That's not a flaw here.
Anti-spam/anti-abuse systems are more suited for the role of mitigating 1:1
abuse than any authenticati
