[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Yahoo DMARC breakage
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>wrote:
On 4/9/2014 7:25 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Yahoo! is choosing to apply the technology for usage scenarios that have
>> long been known to be problematic. Again, they've made an
>
> In fact... it is too generous to say "known to be problematic".
Basic functionality is seriously and utterly broken --- that DMARC doesn't
have a good answer for such situations, is a major indicator of its
immaturity, in the sense that it is "Too specific" a solution and cannot
apply to e-mail in general.
If it were mature: a mechanism would be provided that would allow mailing
lists to function without breaking changes such as substituting From:.
An example of a solution would be the use of a DKIM alternative with not
a single signature for the entire message, but only partial signing of
parts of the message: specifically identified headers and/or specific
body elements, to validate that the message was really sent and certain
elements are genuine ---- and certain elements were modified by the
mailing list.
> informed choice. Whether it's justified and whether it was the right
>> choice is more of a political or management discussion than a technical one.
>>
>
The technical issue, is that the immaturity of the related specs. limits
the decisions are available for a particular domain ---- so,
essentially, if you have certain kind of user traffic: you have to incur
technical issues with mailing lists, or forego using DMARC.
In other words: much as you would like to dismiss as purely a managerial
decision ---- the decisions available to be made are entangled with
the limitations of the technical options that are available for
mitigating spoofing,
AND the public's understanding thereof.
>
>> In technical terms, DMARC is reasonably simple and reasonably well
>> understood and extensively deployed.
>>
>
I would say reasonably simple.
Only well-understood by a very limited fraction of the population of mail
operators.
Not widely deployed; particularly on domains serving end user mailboxes.
>
>> For most discussions, that qualifies as 'mature'...
>>
>>
> Especially after reading some of the discussions on the DMARC mailing list
> where it's clear that issues of breaking mailing lists were explicitly
> ignored and dismissed.
+1.
Common use case ignored and dismissed, is a pretty convincing indicator of
a lack of maturity with regads to the spec.
> Miles Fidelman
>
>
>
> --
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
>
>
>
--
-Mysid