Sender ID

Last updated

Sender ID is an historic [1] anti-spoofing proposal from the former MARID IETF working group that tried to join Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and Caller ID. Sender ID is defined primarily in Experimental RFC 4406, [2] but there are additional parts in RFC 4405, [3] RFC 4407 [4] and RFC 4408. [5] q

Contents

Principles of operation

Sender ID is heavily based on SPF, with only a few additions.

Sender ID tries to improve on SPF: SPF does not verify the header addresses (of which there can be more than one) that indicate the claimed sending party. One of these header addresses is typically displayed to the user and may be used to reply to emails. These header addresses can be different from the address that SPF tries to verify; that is, SPF verifies only the "MAIL FROM" address, also called the envelope sender.

However, there are many similar email header fields that all contain sending party information; therefore Sender ID defines in RFC 4407 [4] a Purported Responsible Address (PRA) as well as a set of heuristic rules to establish this address from the many typical headers in an email.

Syntactically, Sender ID is almost identical to SPF except that v=spf1 is replaced with one of:

The only other syntactical difference is that Sender ID offers the feature of positional modifiers not supported in SPF. In practice, so far no positional modifier has been specified in any Sender ID implementation.

In practice, the pra scheme usually only offers protection when the email is legitimate, while offering no real protection in the case of spam or phishing. The pra for most legitimate email will be either the familiar From: header field, or, in the case of mailing lists, the Sender: header field. In the case of phishing or spam, however, the pra may be based on Resent-* header fields that are often not displayed to the user. To be an effective anti-phishing tool, the MUA (Mail User Agent or Mail Client) will need to be modified to display either the pra for Sender ID, or the Return-Path: header field for SPF.

The pra tries to counter the problem of phishing, while SPF or mfrom tries to counter the problem of spam bounces and other auto-replies to forged Return-Paths. Two different problems with two different proposed solutions. However, Sender-ID and SPF yield the same result in approximately 80% of the cases, according to a billion message analysis. [6]

Standardization issues

The pra has the disadvantage that forwarders and mailing lists can only support it by modifying the mail header, e.g. by inserting a Sender or Resent-Sender. The latter violates RFC 2822 [7] and can be incompatible with RFC 822. [8]

With SPF, mailing lists continue to work as is. Forwarders wishing to support SPF only need to modify SMTP MAIL FROM and RCPT TO, not the mail. This concept is not new: with the original RFC 821 [9] SMTP forwarders always added their host name to the reverse path in the MAIL FROM.

The most problematic point[ according to whom? ] in the core Sender ID specification is its recommendation to interpret v=spf1 policies like spf2.0/mfrom,pra instead of spf2.0/mfrom. This was never intended by all published SPF drafts since 2003, and for an unknown large number of v=spf1 policies an evaluation for pra could cause bogus results for many cases where pra and mfrom are different. This problem was the basis of an appeal to the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). In response to another prior appeal the IESG already noted that Sender ID cannot advance on the IETF standards track without addressing the incompatibility with a MUST in RFC 2822. [7]

Various surveys performed in 2012, when SPF turned from experimental to proposed standard, showed that fewer than 3% of mail domains published specific requests for using the pra, compared to some 40~50% of mail domains using SPF. [6]

Patents

The Sender ID proposal was the subject of controversy regarding licensing issues: Microsoft holds patents [10] [11] on key parts of Sender ID and used to license those patents under terms that were not compatible with the GNU General Public License and which were considered problematic for free software implementations in general. On October 23, 2006, Microsoft placed those patents under the Open Specification Promise, which is compatible with some free and open source licenses, but not with the most recent version of the GPL license, version 3.x.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Email</span> Mail sent using electronic means

Electronic mail is a method of transmitting and receiving messages using electronic devices. It was conceived in the late–20th century as the digital version of, or counterpart to, mail. Email is a ubiquitous and very widely used communication medium; in current use, an email address is often treated as a basic and necessary part of many processes in business, commerce, government, education, entertainment, and other spheres of daily life in most countries.

The Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) is an Internet standard communication protocol for electronic mail transmission. Mail servers and other message transfer agents use SMTP to send and receive mail messages. User-level email clients typically use SMTP only for sending messages to a mail server for relaying, and typically submit outgoing email to the mail server on port 587 or 465 per RFC 8314. For retrieving messages, IMAP is standard, but proprietary servers also often implement proprietary protocols, e.g., Exchange ActiveSync.

An email address identifies an email box to which messages are delivered. While early messaging systems used a variety of formats for addressing, today, email addresses follow a set of specific rules originally standardized by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in the 1980s, and updated by RFC 5322 and 6854. The term email address in this article refers to just the addr-spec in Section 3.4 of RFC 5322. The RFC defines address more broadly as either a mailbox or group. A mailbox value can be either a name-addr, which contains a display-name and addr-spec, or the more common addr-spec alone.

Sender Policy Framework (SPF) is an email authentication method which ensures the sending mail server is authorized to originate mail from the email sender's domain. This authentication only applies to the email sender listed in the "envelope from" field during the initial SMTP connection. If the email is bounced, a message is sent to this address, and for downstream transmission it typically appears in the "Return-Path" header. To authenticate the email address which is actually visible to recipients on the "From:" line, other technologies such as DMARC must be used. Forgery of this address is known as email spoofing, and is often used in phishing and email spam.

Greylisting is a method of defending e-mail users against spam. A mail transfer agent (MTA) using greylisting will "temporarily reject" any email from a sender it does not recognize. If the mail is legitimate, the originating server will try again after a delay, and if sufficient time has elapsed, the email will be accepted.

A bounce message or just "bounce" is an automated message from an email system, informing the sender of a previous message that the message has not been delivered. The original message is said to have "bounced".

Email authentication, or validation, is a collection of techniques aimed at providing verifiable information about the origin of email messages by validating the domain ownership of any message transfer agents (MTA) who participated in transferring and possibly modifying a message.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Message submission agent</span>

A message submission agent (MSA), or mail submission agent, is a computer program or software agent that receives electronic mail messages from a mail user agent (MUA) and cooperates with a mail transfer agent (MTA) for delivery of the mail. It uses ESMTP, a variant of the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), as specified in RFC 6409.

Forward-confirmed reverse DNS (FCrDNS), also known as full-circle reverse DNS, double-reverse DNS, or iprev, is a networking parameter configuration in which a given IP address has both forward (name-to-address) and reverse (address-to-name) Domain Name System (DNS) entries that match each other. This is the standard configuration expected by the Internet standards supporting many DNS-reliant protocols. David Barr published an opinion in RFC 1912 (Informational) recommending it as best practice for DNS administrators, but there are no formal requirements for it codified within the DNS standard itself.

MARID was an IETF working group in the applications area tasked to propose standards for email authentication in 2004. The name is an acronym of MTA Authorization Records In DNS.

The Sender Rewriting Scheme (SRS) is a scheme for bypassing the Sender Policy Framework's (SPF) methods of preventing forged sender addresses. Forging a sender address is also known as email spoofing.

Sieve is a programming language that can be used for email filtering. It owes its creation to the CMU Cyrus Project, creators of Cyrus IMAP server.

In computing, Author Domain Signing Practices (ADSP) is an optional extension to the DKIM E-mail authentication scheme, whereby a domain can publish the signing practices it adopts when relaying mail on behalf of associated authors.

DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) is an email authentication method designed to detect forged sender addresses in email, a technique often used in phishing and email spam.

Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC) is an email authentication protocol. It is designed to give email domain owners the ability to protect their domain from unauthorized use, commonly known as email spoofing. The purpose and primary outcome of implementing DMARC is to protect a domain from being used in business email compromise attacks, phishing email, email scams and other cyber threat activities.

Email forwarding generically refers to the operation of re-sending a previously delivered email to an email address to one or more different email addresses.

Backscatter is incorrectly automated bounce messages sent by mail servers, typically as a side effect of incoming spam.

A bounce address is an email address to which bounce messages are delivered. There are many variants of the name, none of them used universally, including return path, reverse path, envelope from, envelope sender, MAIL FROM, 5321-FROM, return address, From_, Errors-to, etc. It is not uncommon for a single document to use several of these names.

SMTP Authentication, often abbreviated SMTP AUTH, is an extension of the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) whereby a client may log in using any authentication mechanism supported by the server. It is mainly used by submission servers, where authentication is mandatory.

Spam reporting, more properly called abuse reporting, is the action of designating electronic messages as abusive for reporting to an authority so that they can be dealt with. Reported messages can be email messages, blog comments, or any kind of spam.

References

  1. ↑ Alexey Melnikov (7 February 2020). "Moving RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407 (Sender-ID) to Historic". IETF .
  2. ↑ Wong, Meng Weng; Lyon, Jim. Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail. RFC   4406 .
  3. ↑ Katz, Harry; Allman, Eric. SMTP Service Extension for Indicating the Responsible Submitter of an E-Mail Message. doi: 10.17487/RFC4405 . RFC 4405.
  4. 1 2 Lyon, Jim. Purported Responsible Address in E-Mail Messages. doi: 10.17487/RFC4407 . RFC 4407.
  5. ↑ Schlitt, Wayne; Wong, Meng Weng. Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in E-Mail, Version 1. doi: 10.17487/RFC4408 . RFC 4408.
  6. 1 2 Murray Kucherawy (2012). Resolution of the Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and Sender ID Experiments. IETF. doi: 10.17487/RFC6686 . RFC 6686.
  7. 1 2 Resnick, Peter W. Internet Message Format. doi: 10.17487/RFC2822 . RFC 2822.
  8. ↑ Crocker, D. STANDARD FOR THE FORMAT OF ARPA INTERNET TEXT MESSAGES. doi: 10.17487/RFC0822 . RFC 822.
  9. ↑ Postel, J. Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. doi: 10.17487/RFC0821 . RFC 821.
  10. ↑ "FW: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination". IETF MARID List (Mailing list). Archived from the original on 2012-04-14. Retrieved 2011-12-20.
  11. ↑ "Exposed Sender ID Patents up Debate". 20 September 2004.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.