text_combined: qvcimnfiqkwxudxmipassocorg send ietfdkim mailing list submissions gfkyhddlmipassocorg subscribe unsubscribe via world wide web visit httpmipassocorgmailmanlistinfoietfdkim via email send message subject body help qvcimnfiqkwxudxmipassocorg reach person managing list qghtrnrqbhlpvmipassocorg replying please edit subject line specific contents ietfdkim digest todays topics 1 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive wietse venema 2 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive michael thomas 3 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive wietse venema 4 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive steve atkins 5 return issues jim fenton 6 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive hector santos 7 draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive michael thomas 8 return issues michael thomas 9 dead horse ssp failure scenarios john levine 10 ignoring ssp failure scenarios harmful hector santos 11 return issues stephen farrell 12 draftietfdkimssp02txt aspssp section 28 hector santos vvrpgsporcupineorg sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 1 date fri 8 feb 2008 205720 0500 est vvrpgsporcupineorg wietse venema subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive gfkyhddlmipassocorg messageid 200802090157209e9d71f3ea1spikeporcupineorg contenttype textplain charsetusascii mh michael hammer 5304 potential benefit afforded receiver checking ssp assertion taking whatever unspecified action worth effort receivers likely little benefitinterest checking ssp rest discussion moot words juice worth squeeze wietse spammers use dkim ssp therefore juice worth squeeze unless receiver actually knows domain perfect dkimssp total stranger relatively meaningless mh michael hammer im asking terms overall implementation world domains strangers juice definately worth squeeze chicken egg kickstarting adoption far majority email strangers specifically awful lot email recipient apparent senders relationship reason believe experience differs radically people true half pick percentage choicethe domains strangers point benefits checking outweigh costs checking honestly know reasons spammers would start send less email lot spam nothing domain spoofing everything gullible greedy recipients isnt 3ps 01 isnt asp 02 identifiedprotected ssp primarily whitelisting whats known good get mail claims total stranger matter 100 dkimssp compliant dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkimssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process get mail claims total stranger matter 100 dkimssp compliant wietse ysgtmtcccom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 2 date fri 08 feb 2008 181359 0800 michael thomas subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive wietse venema cc gfkyhddlmipassocorg messageid 47ad0c679040507mtcccom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 formatflowed wietse venema wrote mh michael hammer 5304 dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkimssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process youve said several times dont think thats range possibilities agcom pretty good example somebody receiver dont know theyre willing say discard signed things equal wouldnt case pretty squarely secret sauce receiver filter logic im sure point needing agreement filters certainly allowed cautious read mike vvrpgsporcupineorg sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 3 date fri 8 feb 2008 215957 0500 est vvrpgsporcupineorg wietse venema subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive gfkyhddlmipassocorg messageid 2008020902595787e721f3ea1spikeporcupineorg contenttype textplain charsetusascii michael thomas wietse venema wrote mh michael hammer 5304 dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkimssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process youve said several times dont think thats range possibilities agcom pretty good example somebody receiver dont know theyre willing say discard signed things equal wouldnt want would hope receivers dont discard mail simply domain owner says instead would hope hint goes weighting process together indicators wietse gsdszblightycom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 4 date fri 8 feb 2008 191100 0800 steve atkins subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive dkim list messageid 8ae8499628bf400197faea29403ae482blightycom contenttype textplain charsetusascii formatflowed delspyes feb 8 2008 613 pm michael thomas wrote wietse venema wrote mh michael hammer 5304 dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkim ssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process youve said several times dont think thats range possibilities agcom pretty good example somebody receiver dont know theyre willing say discard signed things equal wouldnt noticeable chunk youd discarding would legitimate mail users wanted isp pays attention senders want paying users want dont deserve business driving factor receivers delivering mail users want delivering mail users object direct odds design ssp deliver small fraction email legitimate otherwise case pretty squarely secret sauce receiver filter logic im sure point needing agreement filters certainly allowed cautious read cheers steve dyrbcmciscocom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 5 date fri 08 feb 2008 223153 0800 jim fenton subject ietfdkim return issues ietf dkim wg messageid 47ad48d99080708ciscocom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 formatflowed possibility return discipline tracking individual issues using issue tracker diligent issue scribe eliot lear see lot discussion going around around getting closure raise issue please start subject line new issue issue number issued please replace issue nnnn something like eliot keeps sanity work time time would prefer remain sane id also like see ssp02 close bunch issues currently tracker wg chairs take shot perhaps confirming items marked acceptcheck indeed closed jim mwbfbflsantronicscom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 6 date sat 09 feb 2008 013553 0500 hector santos subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive wietse venema cc gfkyhddlmipassocorg messageid 47ad49c910909santronicscom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 formatflowed wietse venema wrote michael thomas wietse venema wrote mh michael hammer 5304 dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkimssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process youve said several times dont think thats range possibilities agcom pretty good example somebody receiver dont know theyre willing say discard signed things equal wouldnt want would hope receivers dont discard mail simply domain owner says instead would hope hint goes weighting process together indicators look want design products based heuristics thats fine dont tell us implement technology especially mandating via specs methods without doubt highly questionable subjective puts systems domains risk even greater abuse system must based pure true false logic anyones guess work sincerely hector santos cto httpwwwsantronicscom httpsantronicsblogspotcom ysgtmtcccom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 7 date fri 08 feb 2008 223821 0800 michael thomas subject ietfdkim draftietfdkimssp02txt discardableexclusive steve atkins cc dkim list messageid 47ad4a5d2010809mtcccom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 formatflowed steve atkins wrote feb 8 2008 613 pm michael thomas wrote wietse venema wrote mh michael hammer 5304 dkim checking sufficient without ssp might dkimssp help receivers 3 aforementioned well others leverage evaluation received email whether signed valid unsigned known good whitelisting done dkimbase alone ssp etc absence valid signatures help strengthen known good whitelisting process youve said several times dont think thats range possibilities agcom pretty good example somebody receiver dont know theyre willing say discard signed things equal wouldnt noticeable chunk youd discarding would legitimate mail users wanted isp pays attention senders want paying users want dont deserve business seems presuppose owner author domain doesnt control signing practices publish discardable broken unsigned thats pretty much problem legit id like understand get noticeable chunk weve running dkim signing almost 2 years even diverse mail use patterns average megacorp still get 99 verification rates certainly fit bill discardable somebody really fits bill discardable imagine false positives would noise reasons get false positives driving factor receivers delivering mail users want delivering mail users object sure domain tells ought consider tossing something isnt signed dropping pretty big hint users pretty likely object theyre wrong thats problem correct mike ysgtmtcccom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 8 date fri 08 feb 2008 223933 0800 michael thomas subject ietfdkim return issues jim fenton cc ietf dkim wg messageid 47ad4aa59060909mtcccom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 formatflowed jim fenton wrote possibility return discipline tracking individual issues using issue tracker diligent issue scribe eliot lear see lot discussion going around around getting closure raise issue please start subject line new issue issue number issued please replace issue nnnn something like eliot keeps sanity work time time would prefer remain sane id also like see ssp02 close bunch issues currently tracker wg chairs take shot perhaps confirming items marked acceptcheck indeed closed believe issues raised closed far im concerned mike dgrebiecccom sun feb 24 102739 2008 message 9 date 9 feb 2008 070721 0000 john levine subject ietfdkim dead horse ssp failure scenarios gfkyhddlmipassocorg messageid 2008020907072150742qmailsimoneiecccom contenttype textplain charsetiso88591 noticeable chunk youd discarding would legitimate mail users wanted isp pays attention senders want paying users want dont deserve business seems presuppose owner author domain doesnt control signing practices means author domain control perfect control signing practices always paths break ssp eg mailanarticle roaming users sending hotel mtas mailing lists forwarders replace sender lines know id like understand get noticeable chunk weve running dkim signing almost 2 years even diverse mail use patterns average megacorp still get 99 verification rates im sure average megacorp cisco ill bet cisco users send way less html mail businesses example lists like one mutate headers ways break signatures gather may kludge patch dont think expect everyone else sure domain tells ought consider tossing something isnt signed dropping pretty big hint users pretty likely object theyre wrong thats problem correct look back steves previous messages domains bad advice makes isp drop mail users want users blame isp ssp record would make reasonable isp rather gunshy believing advice random ssp records certainly heavily phished domains merit discarding given small fraction total universe mail much likely domains publish ssp discardable instead due admins dont understand means rs john tue 05 aug 2008 163225 0800 ietfdkim digest vol 106 issue 7