On 10/9/2024 11:57 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
checking SPF is a fallback mechanism.
On 10.10.24 12:36, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote:
SPF is a fairly complex, fragile tool and it makes DMARC.. It's
inclusion in DMARC is always justified with language such as you used,
but I'
On 2024-10-11 at 01:59:04 UTC-0400 (Fri, 11 Oct 2024 01:59:04 -0400)
Scott Q. via mailop
is rumored to have said:
Hi John,
if you don't mind me asking, when you say:
which makes it easy for any of their customers to SPF spoof any
other customer.
you mean the header or the envelope from ? A
On 10/11/2024 12:49 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
Yes, SPF has drawbacks. But it is still trivial to implement and
makes DMARC easier to implement as well.
Actually it isn't. And, really, it doesn't.
* It is trivial for a sender to generate an SPF record.
* It is also triv
On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 04:20:23PM +, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote:
> On 10/11/2024 12:49 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
> > Yes, SPF has drawbacks. But it is still trivial to implement and makes
> > DMARC easier to implement as well.
>
>
> Actually it isn't.
That was my init
macros and the nesting/indirection, especially.
d/
On 10/11/2024 1:56 PM, Mark E. Mallett via mailop wrote:
The
macro handling, f
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
mast:@dcrocker@mastodon.social
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mail
> On 11.10.2024 at 00:08 Mark Delany via mailop wrote:
>
> Given that you have to allow for a queue time of multiple days, x= seems of
> marginal value
> - leastwise as an anti-replay mechanism.
If the MTA allows it, it can update the timestamp and expiration time in the
DKIM signature before
> On 11.10.2024 at 08:11 Scott Q. via mailop wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> if you don't mind me asking, when you say:
>
> > which makes it easy for any of their customers to SPF spoof any other
> > customer.
>
> you mean the header or the envelope from ? Afaik, the envelope from is
> (should be!) t
On Fri 11/Oct/2024 14:03:40 +0200 Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
On 11.10.2024 at 00:08 Mark Delany via mailop wrote:
Given that you have to allow for a queue time of multiple days, x= seems of
marginal value
- leastwise as an anti-replay mechanism.
If the MTA allows it, it can update the
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024, Scott Q. wrote:
if you don't mind me asking, when you say:
which makes it easy for any of their customers to SPF spoof any
other customer.
you mean the header or the envelope from ? Afaik, the envelope from is
(should be!) tied to the authenticated user
Indeed it should
On 10/11/2024 5:03 AM, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
The receiving system should validate DMARC at the edge, ie on the very
next hop after the signature has been applied, so the timeframe during
which the DKIM signature needs to be valid can be kept very short.
This would make DKIM more fr
On 10 Oct 2024, at 17:07, Ralph Seichter via mailop wrote:
>
>
Gentlemen, don’t make me tap the sign…
Graeme (in admin mode)
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Hi all
Apologies up front for the not-on-topic message, but I thought I’d let you know
that after having my hip replaced last year - which went extremely well, as it
happens - I now* have prostate cancer. It’s nasty, advanced & metastatic. I
will be starting chemotherapy next week.
*I almost c
12 matches
Mail list logo
