[dmarc-discuss] DMARC thwarted already?

Franck Martin fmartin at linkedin.com
Thu Jun 5 16:43:32 PDT 2014


On Jun 5, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy via dmarc-discuss <dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Les Barstow via dmarc-discuss <dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org> wrote:
> I agree - DMARC does not protect against the From description. But if the MUA were to display the full From header rather than the description only, we might be getting somewhere.
> 
> The rest of your response backs up my point; the will to get this done "right" in a broader sense does not exist and we're left with ineffective band-aids and holes large enough to drive a truck full of phish through.
> 
> +1.  Any comprehensive solution to this cluster of problems requires that the discussion cover everything from the IP layer all the way up through layer 9, and not punt on any of it.  That obviously exceeds the scope of anything we've tried before, but that doesn't change this ultimate requirement.
> 

As pointed to me, this could be a Wicked Problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem and be approached as such which is not the type of problem engineers may handle well.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://dmarc.org/pipermail/dmarc-discuss/attachments/20140605/0f4d206e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://dmarc.org/pipermail/dmarc-discuss/attachments/20140605/0f4d206e/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the dmarc-discuss mailing list