[ietf-dkim] Is accountability binary?
pbaker at verisign.com
Wed Aug 24 07:20:13 PDT 2005
> What that suggests then is that as a recipient implementing
> local decisions you may want to know both the accountable
> forwarder and the accountable origin. Is that a reasonable inference?
> First Question: Must DKIM provide both of these pieces of
> information to you?
> Second question: Do you really truly care about the forwarder
> or is that more an artifact of today's world where it's hard
> to look beyond the forwarder?
To determine whether or not something is spam all I need is to know that
someone in the path is able to vouch for it. Who that is I don't really
As to whether accountability is binary or not, of course there are
shades of grey. There is always going to be a probability that the party
cannot be held accountable.
What really matters is the would-be defaulter's expectation of
accountability. Most criminals will risk a perceived 5% chance of being
caught, few will risk a 95% chance. But it's the perception that
More information about the ietf-dkim