GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc6430

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Li Request for Comments: 6430 B. Leiba Category: Standards Track Huawei Technologies ISSN: 2070-1721 November 2011

             Email Feedback Report Type Value: not-spam

Abstract

 This document defines a new Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) feedback
 report type value: "not-spam".  It can be used to report an email
 message that was mistakenly marked as spam.

Status of This Memo

 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
 Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6430.

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
 document authors.  All rights reserved.
 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
 publication of this document.  Please review these documents
 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
 to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
 described in the Simplified BSD License.

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

Table of Contents

 1. Introduction ....................................................2
    1.1. Discussion .................................................2
 2. Feedback Report Type: not-spam ..................................3
 3. Example .........................................................3
 4. Security Considerations .........................................5
 5. IANA Considerations .............................................6
 6. Acknowledgements ................................................6
 7. References ......................................................6
    7.1. Normative References .......................................6
    7.2. Informative References .....................................6

1. Introduction

 In RFC 5965 [RFC5965], an Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) is defined for
 reporting email abuse.  Currently, two feedback report types are
 defined that are related to the spam problem and that can be used to
 report abusive or fraudulent email messages:
 o  abuse: indicates unsolicited email or some other kind of email
    abuse.
 o  fraud: indicates some kind of fraud or phishing activity.
 This specification defines a new feedback report type: "not-spam".
 It can be used to report a message that was mistakenly marked as
 spam.

1.1. Discussion

 In some cases, the email client receives an email message that was
 incorrectly tagged as spam, perhaps by the email system, or
 accidentally by the user.  The email client accepts the end user's
 "not-spam" report instruction, retrieves information related to the
 message, and reports this email as not-spam to the email operator.
 When the email operator receives the report, it can determine what
 action is appropriate for the particular message and user.  (The
 requirement for a not-spam report type is from the Open Mobile
 Alliance (OMA) Spam Report Requirement Document [OMA-SpamRep-RD].)
 For example, in response to a "not-spam" report, the email system can
 remove the spam tag or otherwise reclassify the message, possibly
 preventing similar email for this user from being marked as spam in
 the future.  The report can be used to adjust the training of an
 automated classifier.  After processing the report, the email

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

 operator might send a notification to the email client about the
 processing result (for example, by moving the message from one
 mailbox to another, such as from "Junk" to "Inbox").
 In most cases, "not-spam" reports will probably not be taken on their
 own, but will be considered along with other information, analysis of
 the message, etc.  Because different users have different needs and
 different views of what constitutes spam, reports from one user might
 or might not be applicable to others.  And because users might
 sometimes press a "report not spam" button accidentally, immediate
 strong action, such as marking all similar messages as "good" based
 on a single report, is probably not the right approach.  Recipients
 of "not-spam" reports need to consider what's right in their
 environments.
 There are anti-spam systems that use (non-standard) "not spam"
 feedback today.  All of them take the reports and mix them with other
 spam reports and other data, using their own algorithms, to determine
 appropriate action.  In no case do the existing systems use a "not
 spam" report as an immediate, automatic override.
 The feedback types "abuse" and "not-spam" can be taken as opposites.
 A mistaken "not-spam" report could be countermanded by a subsequent
 "abuse" report from the same user, and an operator could consider
 collected reports of "abuse" and "not-spam" in making future
 assessments.

2. Feedback Report Type: not-spam

 This document defines a new feedback report type, "not-spam", which
 extends the Email Feedback Reports specification [RFC5965].
 In the first MIME part of the feedback report message, the end user
 or the email client can add information to indicate why the message
 is not considered as spam -- for example, because the originator or
 its domain is well known.

3. Example

 In the example, Joe, a pharmaceuticals sales representative, has
 received a message about discount pharmaceuticals.  Because that is a
 frequent subject of spam email, the message has been marked as spam
 -- incorrectly, in this case.  Joe has reported it as "not-spam", and
 this is an example of the report, shortened (the "[...etc...]" part)
 for presentation here.

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

 Note that the message has been signed using DomainKeys Identified
 Mail (DKIM) [RFC6376] -- a good security practice as suggested in
 Section 8.2 of RFC 5965 [RFC5965].
    DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=abuse; d=example.com;
      c=simple/simple; q=dns/txt; i=abusedesk@example.com;
      h=From:Date:Subject:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
      bh=iF4dMNYs/KepE0HuwfukJCDyjkduUzZFiaHqO9DMIPU=;
      b=e+BF8DCHFGqCp7/pExleNz7pVaLEoT+uWj/8H9DoZpxFI1vNnCTDu14w5v
        ze4mqJkldudVI0JspsYHTYeomhPklCV4F95GfwpM5W+ziUOv7AySTfygPW
        EerczqZwAK88//oaYCFXq3XV9T/z+zlLp3rrirKGmCMCPPcbdSGv/Eg=
    From: <abusedesk@example.com>
    Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2005 17:40:36 EDT
    Subject: FW: Discount on pharmaceuticals
    To: <abuse@example.net>
    Message-ID: <20030712040037.46341.5F8J@example.com>
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=feedback-report;
         boundary="part1_13d.2e68ed54_boundary"
  1. -part1_13d.2e68ed54_boundary

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    This is an email abuse report for an email message received
    from IP 192.0.2.1 on Thu, 8 Mar 2005 14:00:00 EDT.
    For more information about this format please see
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5965
    Comment: I sell pharmaceuticals, so this is not spam for me.
  1. -part1_13d.2e68ed54_boundary

Content-Type: message/feedback-report

    Feedback-Type: not-spam
    User-Agent: SomeGenerator/1.0
    Version: 1
  1. -part1_13d.2e68ed54_boundary

Content-Type: message/rfc822

    Content-Disposition: inline

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

    Received: from mailserver.example.net
         (mailserver.example.net [192.0.2.1])
         by example.com with ESMTP id M63d4137594e46;
         Thu, 08 Mar 2005 14:00:00 -0400
    From: <someone@example.net>
    To: <Undisclosed Recipients>
    Subject: Discount on pharmaceuticals
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-type: text/plain
    Message-ID: 8787KJKJ3K4J3K4J3K4J3.mail@example.net
    Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 12:31:03 -0500
    Hi, Joe.  I got a lead on a source for discounts on
    pharmaceuticals, and I thought you might be interested.
    [...etc...]
    --part1_13d.2e68ed54_boundary--
                      Example 1: not-spam Report

4. Security Considerations

 All of the security considerations from the Email Feedback Reports
 specification [RFC5965] are inherited here.  In addition, the Email
 Feedback Reports Applicability Statement [MARF-AS] contains important
 information about trust relationships and other security- and
 integrity-related aspects of accepting abuse feedback.
 In particular, not-spam reports will likely be used in an attack on a
 filtering system, reporting true spam as "not-spam".  Even in absence
 of malice, some not-spam reports might be made in error, or will only
 apply to the user sending the report.  Operators need to be careful
 in trusting such reports, beyond their applicability to the specific
 user in question.

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

5. IANA Considerations

 IANA has registered the newly defined feedback type name: "not-spam",
 according to the instructions in Section 7.3 of the base
 specification [RFC5965].
 The following has been added to the "Feedback Report Type Values"
 registry:
 Feedback Type Name:  not-spam
 Description:  Indicates that the entity providing the report does not
    consider the message to be spam.  This may be used to correct a
    message that was incorrectly tagged or categorized as spam.
 Published in:  this document
 Status:  current

6. Acknowledgements

 The authors would like to thank Murray S. Kucherawy and Bert
 Greevenbosch for their discussion and review, and J.D. Falk for
 suggesting some explanatory text.

7. References

7.1. Normative References

 [RFC5965]  Shafranovich, Y., Levine, J., and M. Kucherawy, "An
            Extensible Format for Email Feedback Reports", RFC 5965,
            August 2010.

7.2. Informative References

 [MARF-AS]  Falk, J., "Creation and Use of Email Feedback Reports: An
            Applicability Statement for the Abuse Reporting Format
            (ARF)", Work in Progress, September 2011.
 [OMA-SpamRep-RD]
            Open Mobile Alliance, "Mobile Spam Reporting
            Requirements", Candidate Version 1.0 OMA-RD-SpamRep-V1_0-
            20101123-C, November 2010, <http://
            www.openmobilealliance.org/Technical/release_program/docs/
            SpamRep/V1_0-20101123-C/
            OMA-RD-SpamRep-V1_0-20101123-C.pdf>.

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 6430 Email Feedback Type: not-spam November 2011

 [RFC6376]  Crocker, D., Ed., Hansen, T., Ed., and M. Kucherawy, Ed.,
            "DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", RFC 6376,
            September 2011.

Authors' Addresses

 Kepeng Li
 Huawei Technologies
 Huawei Base, Bantian, Longgang District
 Shenzhen, Guangdong  518129
 P.R. China
 Phone: +86-755-28974289
 EMail: likepeng@huawei.com
 Barry Leiba
 Huawei Technologies
 Phone: +1 646 827 0648
 EMail: barryleiba@computer.org
 URI:   http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/

Li & Leiba Standards Track [Page 7]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc6430.txt · Last modified: 2011/11/11 01:19 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki