[ietf-dkim] Is accountability binary?
pbaker at verisign.com
Wed Aug 24 11:03:27 PDT 2005
> [mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of John Levine
> >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?
> I really wish that the two forwarders I use, one at the IEEE
> and one at the Association of Yale Alumni, would do at least
> a cheap and low-error spam filtering pass, say with the XBL,
> which neither one appears to do. The mail that Yale forwards
> to me is almost entirely diploma spam.
> My filters and complaint-bots are special cased to know that
> their received lines are real and to complain to the source
> one level back, but it's a waste of their resources and mine
> to accept this stuff in the first place.
I think that the significant point here is 'special case'. That is
possible to do at the per user level but when you do it at the
enterprise level you have to be careful.
In particular if Hotmail (say) special cases Yale then it has to have a
way to make sure that only the legitimate Yale alumni email is being
forwarded. Otherwise the special case path becomes a potential loophole.
In your case Yale is not doing effective spam filtering, but let us
imagine for a moment that it does so reliably. Hotmail would probably
want the option of relying on the prior spam filtering if it is
effective. Mailing lists tend to have reasonably reliable spam filtering
so it is not that unreasonable an expectation.
More information about the ietf-dkim