Alessandro Vesely writes:
> > Another problem is that my email filtering do check ARC, but
> > spamassassin can only validate ARC signatures, I do not think there is
> > a way to say that it should set SPF/DKIM/DMARC test results based on
> > the valid ARC signature from trusted source, so I can't really use the
> > ARC signatures yet.
> 
> 
> In the fix-forwarding draft, this is the only software to be developed. A 
> possible algorithm for verification could be the following:
> 
> 
> 1) Find "list-id" in the List-Id: header field (which should be unique).
> 
> 2) Find the domain (d=) in the top ARC-Seal: header field (the one with the 
> highest i=).
> 
> 3) Verify that the final part of list-id matches the sealing domain.
> 
> 4) For each recipient, verify that the <recipient, list-id> pair is in the 
> list 
> of active agreements.
> 
> Not a big task, right? This is the only software required, as managing the 
> list 
> of active agreements could be done manually, using a text editor. Oh well, 
> there is also a web form to set up, which should not necessarily require 
> software development. Of course, large companies would automate much more. 
> The 
> point is that even home-grown mail sites can adopt fix-forwarding without any 
> problems.

This only gives you a half of the solution, i.e., after that you know
that you can trust ARC header and it is valid, but you also need to
use the dkim/dmarc/spf result statements from the ARC header to
augment the dkim/dmarc/spf checks done in locally.

If local checksfor dkim/dmarc/spf fail, but trusted signer valid ARC
says it succeeded at that point, then use the result from the ARC
header when considering authentication of the sender.
-- 
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to