The Secure Government Email (SGE) Common Implementation Framework New Zealand’s government is introducing a comprehensive email security framework designed to protect official communications from phishing and domain spoofing. This new framework, which will be mandatory for all government agencies by October 2025, establishes clear technical standards to enhance email security and retire the outdated SEEMail service.  Key Takeaways All NZ government agencies must comply with new email security requirements by October 2025. The new framework strengthens trust and security in government communications by preventing spoofing and phishing. The framework mandates TLS 1.2+, SPF, DKIM, DMARC with p=reject, MTA-STS, and DLP controls. EasyDMARC simplifies compliance with our guided setup, monitoring, and automated reporting. Start a Free Trial What is the Secure Government Email Common Implementation Framework? The Secure Government Email (SGE) Common Implementation Framework is a new government-led initiative in New Zealand designed to standardize email security across all government agencies. Its main goal is to secure external email communication, reduce domain spoofing in phishing attacks, and replace the legacy SEEMail service. Why is New Zealand Implementing New Government Email Security Standards? The framework was developed by New Zealand’s Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) as part of its role in managing ICT Common Capabilities. It leverages modern email security controls via the Domain Name System (DNS) to enable the retirement of the legacy SEEMail service and provide: Encryption for transmission security Digital signing for message integrity Basic non-repudiation (by allowing only authorized senders) Domain spoofing protection These improvements apply to all emails, not just those routed through SEEMail, offering broader protection across agency communications. What Email Security Technologies Are Required by the New NZ SGE Framework? The SGE Framework outlines the following key technologies that agencies must implement: TLS 1.2 or higher with implicit TLS enforced TLS-RPT (TLS Reporting) SPF (Sender Policy Framework) DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail) DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) with reporting MTA-STS (Mail Transfer Agent Strict Transport Security) Data Loss Prevention controls These technologies work together to ensure encrypted email transmission, validate sender identity, prevent unauthorized use of domains, and reduce the risk of sensitive data leaks. Get in touch When Do NZ Government Agencies Need to Comply with this Framework? All New Zealand government agencies are expected to fully implement the Secure Government Email (SGE) Common Implementation Framework by October 2025. Agencies should begin their planning and deployment now to ensure full compliance by the deadline. The All of Government Secure Email Common Implementation Framework v1.0 What are the Mandated Requirements for Domains? Below are the exact requirements for all email-enabled domains under the new framework. ControlExact RequirementTLSMinimum TLS 1.2. TLS 1.1, 1.0, SSL, or clear-text not permitted.TLS-RPTAll email-sending domains must have TLS reporting enabled.SPFMust exist and end with -all.DKIMAll outbound email from every sending service must be DKIM-signed at the final hop.DMARCPolicy of p=reject on all email-enabled domains. adkim=s is recommended when not bulk-sending.MTA-STSEnabled and set to enforce.Implicit TLSMust be configured and enforced for every connection.Data Loss PreventionEnforce in line with the New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) and Protective Security Requirements (PSR). Compliance Monitoring and Reporting The All of Government Service Delivery (AoGSD) team will be monitoring compliance with the framework. Monitoring will initially cover SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS settings and will be expanded to include DKIM. Changes to these settings will be monitored, enabling reporting on email security compliance across all government agencies. Ongoing monitoring will highlight changes to domains, ensure new domains are set up with security in place, and monitor the implementation of future email security technologies.  Should compliance changes occur, such as an agency’s SPF record being changed from -all to ~all, this will be captured so that the AoGSD Security Team can investigate. They will then communicate directly with the agency to determine if an issue exists or if an error has occurred, reviewing each case individually. Deployment Checklist for NZ Government Compliance Enforce TLS 1.2 minimum, implicit TLS, MTA-STS & TLS-RPT SPF with -all DKIM on all outbound email DMARC p=reject  adkim=s where suitable For non-email/parked domains: SPF -all, empty DKIM, DMARC reject strict Compliance dashboard Inbound DMARC evaluation enforced DLP aligned with NZISM Start a Free Trial How EasyDMARC Can Help Government Agencies Comply EasyDMARC provides a comprehensive email security solution that simplifies the deployment and ongoing management of DNS-based email security protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC with reporting. Our platform offers automated checks, real-time monitoring, and a guided setup to help government organizations quickly reach compliance. 1. TLS-RPT / MTA-STS audit EasyDMARC enables you to enable the Managed MTA-STS and TLS-RPT option with a single click. We provide the required DNS records and continuously monitor them for issues, delivering reports on TLS negotiation problems. This helps agencies ensure secure email transmission and quickly detect delivery or encryption failures. Note: In this screenshot, you can see how to deploy MTA-STS and TLS Reporting by adding just three CNAME records provided by EasyDMARC. It’s recommended to start in “testing” mode, evaluate the TLS-RPT reports, and then gradually switch your MTA-STS policy to “enforce”. The process is simple and takes just a few clicks. As shown above, EasyDMARC parses incoming TLS reports into a centralized dashboard, giving you clear visibility into delivery and encryption issues across all sending sources. 2. SPF with “-all”In the EasyDARC platform, you can run the SPF Record Generator to create a compliant record. Publish your v=spf1 record with “-all” to enforce a hard fail for unauthorized senders and prevent spoofed emails from passing SPF checks. This strengthens your domain’s protection against impersonation. Note: It is highly recommended to start adjusting your SPF record only after you begin receiving DMARC reports and identifying your legitimate email sources. As we’ll explain in more detail below, both SPF and DKIM should be adjusted after you gain visibility through reports. Making changes without proper visibility can lead to false positives, misconfigurations, and potential loss of legitimate emails. That’s why the first step should always be setting DMARC to p=none, receiving reports, analyzing them, and then gradually fixing any SPF or DKIM issues. 3. DKIM on all outbound email DKIM must be configured for all email sources sending emails on behalf of your domain. This is critical, as DKIM plays a bigger role than SPF when it comes to building domain reputation, surviving auto-forwarding, mailing lists, and other edge cases. As mentioned above, DMARC reports provide visibility into your email sources, allowing you to implement DKIM accordingly (see first screenshot). If you’re using third-party services like Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, or Mimecast, you’ll need to retrieve the public DKIM key from your provider’s admin interface (see second screenshot). EasyDMARC maintains a backend directory of over 1,400 email sources. We also give you detailed guidance on how to configure SPF and DKIM correctly for major ESPs.  Note: At the end of this article, you’ll find configuration links for well-known ESPs like Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, Zoho Mail, Amazon SES, and SendGrid – helping you avoid common misconfigurations and get aligned with SGE requirements. If you’re using a dedicated MTA (e.g., Postfix), DKIM must be implemented manually. EasyDMARC’s DKIM Record Generator lets you generate both public and private keys for your server. The private key is stored on your MTA, while the public key must be published in your DNS (see third and fourth screenshots). 4. DMARC p=reject rollout As mentioned in previous points, DMARC reporting is the first and most important step on your DMARC enforcement journey. Always start with a p=none policy and configure RUA reports to be sent to EasyDMARC. Use the report insights to identify and fix SPF and DKIM alignment issues, then gradually move to p=quarantine and finally p=reject once all legitimate email sources have been authenticated.  This phased approach ensures full protection against domain spoofing without risking legitimate email delivery. 5. adkim Strict Alignment Check This strict alignment check is not always applicable, especially if you’re using third-party bulk ESPs, such as Sendgrid, that require you to set DKIM on a subdomain level. You can set adkim=s in your DMARC TXT record, or simply enable strict mode in EasyDMARC’s Managed DMARC settings. This ensures that only emails with a DKIM signature that exactly match your domain pass alignment, adding an extra layer of protection against domain spoofing. But only do this if you are NOT a bulk sender. 6. Securing Non-Email Enabled Domains The purpose of deploying email security to non-email-enabled domains, or parked domains, is to prevent messages being spoofed from that domain. This requirement remains even if the root-level domain has SP=reject set within its DMARC record. Under this new framework, you must bulk import and mark parked domains as “Parked.” Crucially, this requires adjusting SPF settings to an empty record, setting DMARC to p=reject, and ensuring an empty DKIM record is in place: • SPF record: “v=spf1 -all”. • Wildcard DKIM record with empty public key.• DMARC record: “v=DMARC1;p=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s;rua=mailto:…”. EasyDMARC allows you to add and label parked domains for free. This is important because it helps you monitor any activity from these domains and ensure they remain protected with a strict DMARC policy of p=reject. 7. Compliance Dashboard Use EasyDMARC’s Domain Scanner to assess the security posture of each domain with a clear compliance score and risk level. The dashboard highlights configuration gaps and guides remediation steps, helping government agencies stay on track toward full compliance with the SGE Framework. 8. Inbound DMARC Evaluation Enforced You don’t need to apply any changes if you’re using Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, or other major mailbox providers. Most of them already enforce DMARC evaluation on incoming emails. However, some legacy Microsoft 365 setups may still quarantine emails that fail DMARC checks, even when the sending domain has a p=reject policy, instead of rejecting them. This behavior can be adjusted directly from your Microsoft Defender portal. Read more about this in our step-by-step guide on how to set up SPF, DKIM, and DMARC from Microsoft Defender. If you’re using a third-party mail provider that doesn’t enforce having a DMARC policy for incoming emails, which is rare, you’ll need to contact their support to request a configuration change. 9. Data Loss Prevention Aligned with NZISM The New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) is the New Zealand Government’s manual on information assurance and information systems security. It includes guidance on data loss prevention (DLP), which must be followed to be aligned with the SEG. Need Help Setting up SPF and DKIM for your Email Provider? Setting up SPF and DKIM for different ESPs often requires specific configurations. Some providers require you to publish SPF and DKIM on a subdomain, while others only require DKIM, or have different formatting rules. We’ve simplified all these steps to help you avoid misconfigurations that could delay your DMARC enforcement, or worse, block legitimate emails from reaching your recipients. Below you’ll find comprehensive setup guides for Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, Zoho Mail, Amazon SES, and SendGrid. You can also explore our full blog section that covers setup instructions for many other well-known ESPs. Remember, all this information is reflected in your DMARC aggregate reports. These reports give you live visibility into your outgoing email ecosystem, helping you analyze and fix any issues specific to a given provider. Here are our step-by-step guides for the most common platforms: Google Workspace Microsoft 365 These guides will help ensure your DNS records are configured correctly as part of the Secure Government Email (SGE) Framework rollout. Meet New Government Email Security Standards With EasyDMARC New Zealand’s SEG Framework sets a clear path for government agencies to enhance their email security by October 2025. With EasyDMARC, you can meet these technical requirements efficiently and with confidence. From protocol setup to continuous monitoring and compliance tracking, EasyDMARC streamlines the entire process, ensuring strong protection against spoofing, phishing, and data loss while simplifying your transition from SEEMail.

html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd" Japanese architect Shigeru Ban has created the Blue Ocean Dome (BOD) for the Osaka-Kansai Expo 2025, addressing the urgent issue of marine plastic pollution and raising crucial awareness about it.Named Blue Ocean Dome, the pavilion stands out with its innovative design, comprising three distinct dome types: Dome A, Dome B, and Dome C. Each dome is specifically crafted to host captivating installations and dynamic exhibitions, promising an unforgettable experience for all visitors throughout the event. Image © Taiki FukaoThe project was commissioned by the Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives (ZERI), a global network of creative minds, seeking solutions to the ever increasing problems of the world.Rather than outright rejecting plastic, the pavilion inspires deep reflection on how we use and manage materials, highlighting our critical responsibility to make sustainable choices for the future.The BOD merges traditional and modern materials—like bamboo, paper, and carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP)—to unlock new and innovative architectural possibilities.Dome A, serving as the striking entrance, is expertly crafted from laminated bamboo. This innovative design not only showcases the beauty of bamboo but also tackles the pressing issue of abandoned bamboo groves in Japan, which pose a risk to land stability due to their shallow root systems.Utilizing raw bamboo for structural purposes is often difficult; however, through advanced processing, it is transformed into thin, laminated boards that boast strength even greater than that of conventional wood. These boards have been skillfully fashioned into a remarkable 19-meter dome, drawing inspiration from traditional Japanese bamboo hats. This project brilliantly turns an environmental challenge into a sustainable architectural solution, highlighting the potential of bamboo as a valuable resource.Dome B stands as the central and largest structure of its kind, boasting a remarkable diameter of 42 meters. It is primarily constructed from Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP), a cutting-edge material revered for its extraordinary strength-to-weight ratio—four times stronger than steel yet only one-fifth the weight. While CFRP is predominantly seen in industries such as aerospace and automotive due to its high cost, its application in architecture is pioneering.In this project, the choice of CFRP was not just advantageous; it was essential. The primary goal was to minimize the foundation weight on the reclaimed land of the Expo site, making sustainability a top priority. To mitigate the environmental consequences of deep foundation piles, the structure had to be lighter than the soil excavated for its foundation. CFRP not only met this stringent requirement but also ensured the dome's structural integrity, showcasing a perfect marriage of innovation and environmental responsibility.Dome C, with its impressive 19-meter diameter, is crafted entirely from paper tubes that are 100% recyclable after use. Its innovative design features a three-dimensional truss structure, connected by elegant wooden spheres, evoking the beauty of molecular structures.To champion sustainability and minimize waste following the six-month Expo, the entire BOD pavilion has been meticulously designed for effortless disassembly and relocation. It is anchored by a robust steel foundation system and boasts a modular design that allows it to be conveniently packed into standard shipping containers. After the Expo concludes, this remarkable pavilion will be transported to the Maldives, where it will be transformed into a stunning resort facility, breathing new life into its design and purpose.Recently, Shigeru Ban's Paper Log House was revealed at Philip Johnson's Glass House Venue. In addition, Ban installed his Paper Partition Shelters (PPS) for the victims of the Turkey-Syria earthquake in Mersin and Hatay provinces of Turkey.All images © Hiroyuki Hirai unless otherwise stated.> via Shigeru Ban Architects 

Email authentication protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC play a critical role in protecting domains from spoofing and phishing. However, when SEGs are introduced into the email path, the interaction with these protocols becomes more complex. Security gateways(SEGs) are a core part of many organizations’ email infrastructure. They act as intermediaries between the public internet and internal mail systems, inspecting, filtering, and routing messages. This blog examines how security gateways handle SPF, DKIM, and DMARC, with real-world examples from popular gateways such as Proofpoint, Mimecast, and Avanan. We’ll also cover best practices for maintaining authentication integrity and avoiding misconfigurations that can compromise email authentication or lead to false DMARC failures. Security gateways often sit at the boundary between your organization and the internet, managing both inbound and outbound email traffic. Their role affects how email authentication protocols behave. An inbound SEG examines emails coming into your organization. It checks SPF, DKIM, and DMARC to determine if the message is authentic and safe before passing it to your internal mail servers. An outbound SEG handles emails sent from your domain. It may modify headers, rewrite envelope addresses, or even apply DKIM signing. All of these can impact SPF,  DKIM, or DMARC validation on the recipient’s side. Understanding how SEGs influence these flows is crucial to maintaining proper authentication and avoiding unexpected DMARC failures. Inbound Handling of SPF, DKIM, and DMARC by Common Security Gateways When an email comes into your organization, your security gateway is the first to inspect it. It checks whether the message is real, trustworthy, and properly authenticated. Let’s look at how different SEGs handle these checks. Avanan (by Check Point) SPF: Avanan verifies whether the sending server is authorized to send emails for the domain by checking the SPF record. DKIM: It verifies if the message was signed by the sending domain and if that signature is valid. DMARC: It uses the results of the SPF and DKIM check to evaluate DMARC. However, final enforcement usually depends on how DMARC is handled by Microsoft 365 or Gmail, as Avanan integrates directly with them. Avanan offers two methods of integration:1. API integration: Avanan connects via APIs, no change in MX, usually Monitor or Detect modes.2. Inline integration: Avanan is placed inline in the mail flow (MX records changed), actively blocking or remediating threats. Proofpoint Email Protection SPF: Proofpoint checks SPF to confirm the sender’s IP is authorized to send on behalf of the domain. You can set custom rules (e.g. treat “softfail” as “fail”). DKIM: It verifies DKIM signatures and shows clear pass/fail results in logs. DMARC: It fully evaluates DMARC by combining SPF and DKIM results with alignment checks. Administrators can configure how to handle messages that fail DMARC, such as rejecting, quarantining, or delivering them. Additionally, Proofpoint allows whitelisting specific senders you trust, even if their emails fail authentication checks. Integration Methods Inline Mode: In this traditional deployment, Proofpoint is positioned directly in the email flow by modifying MX records. Emails are routed through Proofpoint’s infrastructure, allowing it to inspect and filter messages before they reach the recipient’s inbox. This mode provides pre-delivery protection and is commonly used in on-premises or hybrid environments. API-Based (Integrated Cloud Email Security – ICES) Mode: Proofpoint offers API-based integration, particularly with cloud email platforms like Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. In this mode, Proofpoint connects to the email platform via APIs, enabling it to monitor and remediate threats post-delivery without altering the email flow. This approach allows for rapid deployment and seamless integration with existing cloud email services. Mimecast SPF: Mimecast performs SPF checks to verify whether the sending server is authorized by the domain’s SPF record. Administrators can configure actions for SPF failures, including block, quarantine, permit, or tag with a warning. This gives flexibility in balancing security with business needs. DKIM: It validates DKIM signatures by checking that the message was correctly signed by the sending domain and that the content hasn’t been tampered with. If the signature fails, Mimecast can take actions based on your configured policies. DMARC: It fully evaluates DMARC by combining the results of SPF and DKIM with domain alignment checks. You can choose to honor the sending domain’s DMARC policy (none, quarantine, reject) or apply custom rules, for example, quarantining or tagging messages that fail DMARC regardless of the published policy. This allows more granular control for businesses that want to override external domain policies based on specific contexts. Integration Methods Inline Deployment: Mimecast is typically deployed as a cloud-based secure email gateway. Organizations update their domain’s MX records to point to Mimecast, so all inbound (and optionally outbound) emails pass through it first. This allows Mimecast to inspect, filter, and process emails before delivery, providing robust protection. API Integrations: Mimecast also offers API-based services through its Mimecast API platform, primarily for management, archival, continuity, and threat intelligence purposes. However, API-only email protection is not Mimecast’s core model. Instead, the APIs are used to enhance the inline deployment, not replace it. Barracuda Email Security Gateway SPF: Barracuda checks the sender’s IP against the domain’s published SPF record. If the check fails, you can configure the system to block, quarantine, tag, or allow the message, depending on your policy preferences. DKIM: It validates whether the incoming message includes a valid DKIM signature. The outcome is logged and used to inform further policy decisions or DMARC evaluations. DMARC: It combines SPF and DKIM results, checks for domain alignment, and applies the DMARC policy defined by the sender. Administrators can also choose to override the DMARC policy, allowing messages to pass or be treated differently based on organizational needs (e.g., trusted senders or internal exceptions). Integration Methods Inline mode (more common and straightforward): Barracuda Email Security Gateway is commonly deployed inline by updating your domain’s MX records to point to Barracuda’s cloud or on-premises gateway. This ensures that all inbound emails pass through Barracuda first for filtering and SPF, DKIM, and DMARC validation before being delivered to your mail servers. Deployment Behind the Corporate Firewall: Alternatively, Barracuda can be deployed in transparent or bridge mode without modifying MX records. In this setup, the gateway is placed inline at the network level, such as behind a firewall, and intercepts mail traffic transparently. This method is typically used in complex on-premises environments where changing DNS records is not feasible. Cisco Secure Email (formerly IronPort) Cisco Secure Email acts as an inline gateway for inbound email, usually requiring your domain’s MX records to point to the Cisco Email Security Appliance or cloud service. SPF: Cisco Secure Email verifies whether the sending server is authorized in the sender domain’s SPF record. Administrators can set detailed policies on how to handle SPF failures. DKIM: It validates the DKIM signature on incoming emails and logs whether the signature is valid or has failed. DMARC: It evaluates DMARC by combining SPF and DKIM results along with domain alignment checks. Admins can configure specific actions, such as quarantine, reject, or tag, based on different failure scenarios or trusted sender exceptions. Integration methods On-premises Email Security Appliance (ESA): You deploy Cisco’s hardware or virtual appliance inline, updating MX records to route mail through it for filtering. Cisco Cloud Email Security: Cisco offers a cloud-based email security service where MX records are pointed to Cisco’s cloud infrastructure, which filters and processes inbound mail. Cisco Secure Email also offers advanced, rule-based filtering capabilities and integrates with Cisco’s broader threat protection ecosystem, enabling comprehensive inbound email security. Outbound Handling of SPF, DKIM, and DMARC by Common Security Gateways When your organization sends emails, security gateways can play an active role in processing and authenticating those messages. Depending on the configuration, a gateway might rewrite headers, re-sign messages, or route them through different IPs – all actions that can help or hurt the authentication process. Let’s look at how major SEGs handle outbound email flow. Avanan – Outbound Handling and Integration Methods Outbound Logic Avanan analyzes outbound emails primarily to detect data loss, malware, and policy violations. In API-based integration, emails are sent directly by the original mail server (e.g., Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace), so SPF and DKIM signatures remain intact. Avanan does not alter the message or reroute traffic, which helps maintain full DMARC alignment and domain reputation. Integration Methods 1. API Integration: Connects to Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace via API. No MX changes are needed. Emails are scanned after they are sent, with no modification to SPF, DKIM, or the delivery path.  How it works: Microsoft Graph API or Google Workspace APIs are used to monitor and intervene in outbound emails. Protection level: Despite no MX changes, it can offer inline-like protection, meaning it can block, quarantine, or encrypt emails before they are delivered externally. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: Preserves original headers and signatures since mail is sent directly from Microsoft/Google servers. 2. Inline Integration: Requires changing MX records to route email through Avanan. In this mode, Avanan can intercept and inspect outbound emails before delivery. Depending on the configuration, this may affect SPF or DKIM if not properly handled. How it works: Requires adding Avanan’s Protection level: Traditional inline security with full visibility and control, including encryption, DLP, policy enforcement, and advanced threat protection. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: SPF configuration is needed by adding Avanan’s include mechanism to the sending domain’s SPF record. The DKIM record of the original sending source is preserved. For configurations, you can refer to the steps in this blog. Proofpoint – Outbound Handling and Integration Methods Outbound Logic Proofpoint analyzes outbound emails to detect and prevent data loss (DLP), to identify advanced threats (malware, phishing, BEC) originating from compromised internal accounts, and to ensure compliance. Their API integration provides crucial visibility and powerful remediation capabilities, while their traditional gateway (MX record) deployment delivers true inline, pre-delivery blocking for outbound traffic. Integration methods 1. API Integration: No MX record changes are required for this deployment method. Integration is done with Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace. How it works: Through its API integration, Proofpoint gains deep visibility into outbound emails and provides layered security and response features, including: Detect and alert: Identifies sensitive content (Data Loss Prevention violations), malicious attachments, or suspicious links in outbound emails. Post-delivery remediation (TRAP): A key capability of the API model is Threat Response Auto-Pull (TRAP), which enables Proofpoint to automatically recall, quarantine, or delete emails after delivery. This is particularly useful for internally sent messages or those forwarded to other users. Enhanced visibility: Aggregates message metadata and logs into Proofpoint’s threat intelligence platform, giving security teams a centralized view of outbound risks and user behavior. Protection level: API-based integration provides strong post-delivery detection and response, as well as visibility into DLP incidents and suspicious behavior.  SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: Proofpoint does not alter SPF, DKIM, or DMARC because emails are sent directly through Microsoft or Google servers. Since Proofpoint’s servers are not involved in the actual sending process, the original authentication headers remain intact. 2. Gateway Integration (MX Record/Smart Host): This method requires updating MX records or routing outbound mail through Proofpoint via a smart host. How it works: Proofpoint acts as an inline gateway, inspecting emails before delivery. Inbound mail is filtered via MX changes; outbound mail is relayed through Proofpoint’s servers. Threat and DLP filtering: Scans outbound messages for sensitive content, malware, and policy violations. Real-time enforcement: Blocks, encrypts, or quarantines emails before they’re delivered. Policy controls: Applies rules based on content, recipient, or behavior. Protection level: Provides strong, real-time protection for outbound traffic with pre-delivery enforcement, DLP, and encryption. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: Proofpoint becomes the sending server: SPF: You need to configure ProofPoint’s SPF. DKIM: Can sign messages; requires DKIM setup. DMARC: DMARC passes if SPF and DKIM are set up properly. Please refer to this article to configure SPF and DKIM for ProofPoint. Mimecast – Outbound Handling and Integration Methods Outbound Logic Mimecast inspects outbound emails to prevent data loss (DLP), detect internal threats such as malware and impersonation, and ensure regulatory compliance. It primarily functions as a Secure Email Gateway (SEG), meaning it sits directly in the outbound email flow. While Mimecast offers APIs, its core outbound protection is built around this inline gateway model. Integration Methods 1. Gateway Integration (MX Record change required) This is Mimecast’s primary method for outbound email protection. Organizations route their outbound traffic through Mimecast by configuring their email server (e.g., Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, etc.) to use Mimecast as a smart host. This enables Mimecast to inspect and enforce policies on all outgoing emails in real time. How it works: Updating outbound routing in your email system (smart host settings), or Using Mimecast SMTP relay to direct messages through their infrastructure. Mimecast then scans, filters, and applies policies before the email reaches the final recipient. Protection level: Advanced DLP: Identifies and prevents sensitive data leaks. Impersonation and Threat Protection: Blocks malware, phishing, and abuse from compromised internal accounts. Email Encryption and Secure Messaging: Applies encryption policies or routes messages via secure portals. Regulatory Compliance: Enforces outbound compliance rules based on content, recipient, or metadata. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: SPF: Your SPF record must include Mimecast’s SPF mechanism based on your region to avoid SPF failures. DKIM: A new DKIM record should be configured to make sure your emails are DKIM signed when routing through Mimecast. DMARC: With correct SPF and DKIM setup, Mimecast ensures DMARC alignment, maintaining your domain’s sending reputation. Please refer to the steps in this detailed article to set up SPF and DKIM for Mimecast. 2. API Integration (Complementary to Gateway) Mimecast’s APIs complement the main gateway by providing automation, reporting, and management tools rather than handling live outbound mail flow. They allow you to manage policies, export logs, search archived emails, and sync users. APIs enhance visibility and operational tasks but do not provide real-time filtering or blocking of outbound messages. Since APIs don’t process live mail, they have no direct effect on SPF, DKIM, or DMARC; those depend on your gateway (smart host) setup. Barracuda – Outbound Handling and Integration Methods Outbound Logic Barracuda analyzes outbound emails to prevent data loss (DLP), block malware, stop phishing/impersonation attempts from compromised internal accounts, and ensure compliance. Barracuda offers flexible deployment options, including both traditional gateway (MX record) and API-based integrations. While both contribute to outbound security, their roles are distinct. Integration Methods 1. Gateway Integration (MX Record / Smart Host) — Primary Inline Security How it works: All outbound emails pass through Barracuda’s security stack for real-time inspection, threat blocking, and policy enforcement before delivery. Protection level: Comprehensive DLP (blocking, encrypting, or quarantining sensitive content)  Outbound spam and virus filtering  Enforcement of compliance and content policies This approach offers a high level of control and immediate threat mitigation on outbound mail flow. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: SPF: Update SPF records to include Barracuda’s sending IPs or SPF include mechanism. DKIM: Currently, no explicit setup is needed; DKIM of the main sending source is preserved. Refer to this article for more comprehensive guidance on Barracuda SEG configuration. 2. API Integration (Complementary & Advanced Threat Focus) How it works: The API accesses cloud email environments to analyze historical and real-time data, learning normal communication patterns to detect anomalies in outbound emails. It also supports post-delivery remediation, enabling the removal of malicious emails from internal mailboxes after sending. Protection level: Advanced AI-driven detection and near real-time blocking of outbound threats, plus strong post-delivery cleanup capabilities. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: Since mail is sent directly by the original mail server (e.g., Microsoft 365), SPF and DKIM signatures remain intact, preserving DMARC alignment and domain reputation. Cisco Secure Email (formerly IronPort) – Outbound Handling and Integration Methods Outbound Logic Cisco Secure Email protects outbound email by preventing data loss (DLP), blocking spam and malware from internal accounts, stopping business email compromise (BEC) and impersonation attacks, and ensuring compliance. Cisco provides both traditional gateway appliances/cloud gateways and modern API-based solutions for layered outbound security. Integration Methods 1. Gateway Integration (MX Record / Smart Host) – Cisco Secure Email Gateway (ESA) How it works: Organizations update MX records to route mail through the Cisco Secure Email Gateway or configure their mail server (e.g., Microsoft 365, Exchange) to smart host outbound email via the gateway. All outbound mail is inspected and policies enforced before delivery. Protection level: Granular DLP (blocking, encrypting, quarantining sensitive content) Outbound spam and malware filtering to protect IP reputation Email encryption for sensitive outbound messages Comprehensive content and attachment policy enforcement SPF: Check this article for comprehensive guidance on Cisco SPF settings. DKIM: Refer to this article for detailed guidance on Cisco DKIM settings. 2. API Integration – Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense How it works: Integrates directly via API with Microsoft 365 (and potentially Google Workspace), continuously monitoring email metadata, content, and user behavior across inbound, outbound, and internal messages. Leverages Cisco’s threat intelligence and AI to detect anomalous outbound activity linked to BEC, account takeover, and phishing. Post-Delivery Remediation: Automates the removal or quarantine of malicious or policy-violating emails from mailboxes even after sending. Protection level: Advanced, AI-driven detection of sophisticated outbound threats with real-time monitoring and automated remediation. Complements gateway filtering by adding cloud-native visibility and swift post-send action. SPF/DKIM/DMARC impact: Since emails are sent directly by the original mail server, SPF and DKIM signatures remain intact, preserving DMARC alignment and domain reputation. If you have any questions or need assistance, feel free to reach out to EasyDMARC technical support.

Insurance is a modern necessity—and it can often be a literal lifesaver. When any sort of disaster strikes, whether it’s to your property, your business, or your health, getting a payment on your claim can mean the difference between getting through the emergency in one piece and being buried under bills for years to come.While it might seem pretty straightforward, anyone who’s actually dealt with insurance companies knows that their least favorite thing to do in this world is pay out on claims. In fact, studies have found that 17% of claims made to HealthCare.gov insurers and 18% of claims made to private insurers are denied—with some insurance companies rejecting nearly 50% of all claims.In fact, some insurers employ several legal but underhanded tricks to avoid paying out on claims. Here are five common tricks insurance companies will use against you.Moving as slowly as possibleThe simplest trick an insurance company can play is to drag their feet on your claim—there’s a reason the phrase “deny and delay” has become linked to the insurance industry as a whole. This tactic works because your insurer knows you’re desperate for a settlement on your claim; that’s the whole point of insurance. The longer they make you wait, the more likely you’ll accept whatever they offer you, even if you know it’s much less than you’re entitled to.Delay tactics vary, but can include:Documentation overload. Insurance companies sometimes request huge amounts of (sometimes unnecessary) documentation that takes a lot of time to procure and organize.Personnel swaps. Insurers may change the adjuster and other employees on your case, with each new person requiring some time to review the claim and get up to speed.Claiming no response. Your insurer asked for something, and you provided it. Weeks later they claim they never received it, and ask that you submit it again.The best way to counter these tactics is meticulous record-keeping. If you feel that your insurer is asking for unnecessary documentation, ask them to explain why they need the documents—this sometimes makes document requests magically vanish. Send all written communications via certified mail and turn on read receipts for emails and other electronic communications.Love bombingInsurers are often extremely nice to you when you initially start dealing with them. They express sympathy, use the words “I’m sorry” in the context of your injuries or loss, and generally sound warm and friendly. That’s nice, and may even be genuine. But it’s also a tactic they use to delay or eventually find reasons to deny your claim.Studies have found that apologies can be weaponized, and that people will tolerate delays and settle for less if they think the other party is taking responsibility or expressing empathy. Being excessively nice to you can fool you into thinking you can rely on the insurer to handle things on your behalf. This lets the company delay as much as possible, stringing you along. Love bombing like this can also get you to say things you shouldn’t say—as we’ll see in the next entry.Twisting your wordsAnother reason an insurance adjuster or other employee might apologize to you? Because it can gently goad you into expressing regrets of your own which can then be used against you. Any expression of apology or regret could be interpreted as an admittance of fault. And establishing a friendly, sympathetic rapport with you could be a tactic to get you to say more than you should by speculating on causes or your responsibility in a claim.For example, while speaking with a friendly adjuster about a car accident you were involved with, you might tell them you wish you’d noticed the other car driving erratically—if you had, you might have avoided the accident. This might seem like a simple observation, but it could be twisted into an admittance that you weren’t paying attention—and thus your claim is denied.Insurers will also sometimes demand that you submit a recorded statement, often very quickly after the incident covered by the claim. They will sometimes state that this is best for you, as it will get the claim moving more quickly. But a rushed recorded statement can also lead to a denied claim—if you’re wrong or inaccurate about anything in your statement, this could be used as a basis for denial.To avoid the tactics listed above, follow a few simple rules for dealing with insurers:Lawyer up. Hiring a lawyer to help you deal with insurance claims might seem like overkill, but you should always have a lawyer with you when speaking with insurers. An experienced attorney can ensure you don’t say anything that could hurt your claim.Never record. You’re typically not required to submit recorded statements, so don’t do it. Insist that all communications be done in person or over the phone, with your attorney present.Be suspicious. If an adjuster or other representative of the insurance company is overly friendly, don’t fall for it. Their sympathy might be genuine, but it can still get you into trouble if you let your guard down.RushingIronically, an effective tactic to delay and deny claims is to rush things. You file your claim, and before you can get organized, hire a lawyer, and recover from whatever happened, the insurer is on the phone, offering a settlement. This is often combined with pressure—like sending you a letter stating that you have two weeks to accept the settlement offer, or the company will “close the file.”This is usually designed to reduce the payout—that easy, fast settlement is probably for a lot less than the amount you’re actually entitled to—and to force errors on your part. By rushing to pull together information, you’ll probably make mistakes that can then be used to deny the claim.You can defend against this in two simple ways:Slow down. Ignore pressure to respond immediately or by arbitrary deadlines. Take your time, gather information, and respond when you’re ready. An attorney can help by acting as a buffer between you and the company.Know the statute. If your insurer tells you it will close your claim file, let it happen. It’s a meaningless administrative action. Your state’s laws will have a defined Statute of Limitations on your claim—a period of time when you’re legally allowed to pursue the claim. As long as you’re within that time period, you can force the insurer to re-open the claim.LowballingIf your insurer doesn’t think it can totally deny your claim, it may offer you a lowball settlement. You shouldn’t accept an insurance company’s calculations as gospel. In fact, the most important piece of information you can have about the claims process is that you are allowed to hire your own insurance adjuster. A public insurance adjuster works for you, not the insurance company, and will often arrive at a much higher figure for your claim.Hiring your own adjuster also insulates you from internal delays, as you won’t have to wait on your insurer’s processes or play phone tag with their adjuster. In addition to an experienced lawyer, a public adjuster can also ensure that you have all the support and knowledge you need to navigate the often murky world of insurance claims.

Apple rejected nearly two million apps in 2024, cracking down harder than ever on fraud, spam, and low-effort software.The App Store saw 813 million weekly visitorsThe company rejected 1.93 million app submissions in 2024, according to its App Store Transparency Report, released in May 2025. The annual report outlines how Apple enforces App Store policies and manages content across its global platform.Apple reviewed approximately 7.7 million app submissions in 2024, rejecting over 1.9 million for failing to meet its standards. Nearly one in four were denied, typically for violating rules around performance, design, or business practices. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

A group of young people — as young as 7 and as old as 25 — are suing the Trump administration to stop its assault on renewable energy and climate action. Executive orders President Donald Trump signed to promote fossil fuels amount to an “unconstitutional” overreach of power, they allege in a complaint filed Thursday at a US District Court in Montana. The 22 plaintiffs also claim that by increasing pollution and denying climate science, the president’s actions violate their Fifth Amendment rights to life and liberty.It’s the latest high-profile case brought against governments by youth concerned about how fossil fuel pollution and climate change poses risks to their health and ability to thrive as they grow up. Two brothers, aged 11 and 7, “were born into climate change-induced smoke seasons that did not exist for older generations”Two brothers, aged 11 and 7 and named “J.K.” and “N.K.” in the suit, “were born into climate change-induced smoke seasons that did not exist for older generations and which compromise their health,” the complaint says. They grew up mostly in Montana but now live in Southern California, and the suit says wildfire smoke has encroached on their lives from state to state. J.K. was born with an abnormal mass of lung tissue and “experienced nosebleeds, sore throats, headaches, tiredness, coughing, trouble breathing, and eye irritation from wildfire smoke,” according to the suit. N.K. has “frequent” upper respiratory infections that have led to emergency room visits. They’ve both missed school days and camp because of feeling sick from smoke and soot in the air from wildfires, it says.Greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels trap heat, and rising temperatures have contributed to longer fire seasons in the western US. With hotter, drier conditions, the area burned by forest fires in the western US doubled between 1984 and 2015. “Every additional ton of [greenhouse gas] pollution and increment of heat Defendants cause will cause J.K. and N.K. more days of poor air quality, more smoke, and thus, more harm to their lives, health, and safety,” the complaint adds.In recent years, scientists have been trying to better understand the long-term health impact of wildfire smoke, which previously hadn’t been studied as thoroughly as pollution from other sources thought to be more consistent problems, like factories and highways. Now, chronic exposure to wildfire smoke is a growing concern. Wildfire smoke is considered a neurotoxin estimated to be more harmful than other common air pollutants, but its effects on the body can vary depending on what kinds of materials burn and how chemicals released by the fire interact with other substances in the atmosphere. After campaigning on a promise to “drill, baby, drill” and accepting more than $75 million in contributions from oil and gas interests, Trump signed executive orders on his first day in office declaring a purported “national energy emergency,” directing federal agencies to “unleash” domestic fossil fuel production and promote the use of gas-powered vehicles over EVs. He signed another executive order to “reinvigorat[e]” the coal industry in April. Coal releases more planet-heating pollution when burned than other fossil fuels and has struggled to compete with cheaper sources of electricity.The plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief to block implementation of those executive orders and to declare them unconstitutional. They also claim that Trump lacks the authority to erode environmental protections passed by Congress under the Clean Air Act. The administration’s efforts to impede scientific research and remove climate information from federal websites amounts to “censorship” and denies plaintiffs access to resources they might otherwise be able to use to minimize risks they face from climate change, the suit alleges.In response to the lawsuit, White House assistant press secretary Taylor Rogers said in an email to The Verge, “The American people are more concerned with the future generations’ economic and national security, which is why they elected President Trump in a landslide victory to restore America’s energy dominance. Future generations should not have to foot the bill of the lefts’ radical climate agenda.” The plaintiffs, who hail from Montana, Oregon, Hawai‘i, California, and Florida, are represented by the nonprofit law firm Our Children’s Trust, which has also represented young people in similar climate cases. A federal appellate court dismissed another case that youth filed against the Obama administration in 2015 over fossil fuel pollution causing climate change, and the US Supreme Court ended that legal battle this year when it declined to hear an appeal.But there have also been some wins. A group of youth reached a settlement last year with the state of Hawai‘i and its Department of Transportation that commits them to a plan to reach zero greenhouse gas emissions from transportation by 2045. J.K. and N.K. were also plaintiffs in a climate suit filed against the state of Montana. Last year, Montana’s Supreme Court upheld a district judge ruling affirming their right to a clean and healthy environment and rejecting policies that had barred officials from considering the consequences of climate change when permitting new energy projects.See More:

MM33 Apartment / bunoSave this picture!Apartments, Apartment Interiors•Khet Khlong Toei, Thailand Architects: buno Area Area of this architecture project Area:  54 m² Year Completion year of this architecture project Year:  2023 Photographs Photographs:Napat PattrayanondMore SpecsLess Specs Save this picture! Text description provided by the architects. MM33 Apartment rethinks a typical domestic milieu, a commercialized urban housing unit where room sizes are predominantly determined more by the logic of sales and marketing data rather than the dynamics of life. To create more space for flexible usages and for a sense of spaciousness, the rigid sense of room making is challenged, and the assumed standard dimensions are discarded for more meticulously compact scales.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!The new design turns a one-bedroom apartment into an open-plan space, in which "rooms" are pushed against the boundaries to make space for an airy, unobstructed "court." These rooms—the sleeping, lounging, dressing, and bathroom areas—are reduced to their optimum sizes; although small, they fit just right, for these dimensions are carefully specified accordingly to the user's scale and requirements.  The court space is functionally for cooking and dining. But it also acts as a borrowed visual space for the rooms besides. So, the space perceived is bigger.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!The extension of space is possible due to the use of operable walls that gently divide the court from the others while allowing for a sense of connection, instead of fixed and opaque partitioning. The curtains permit flexibility of use and make a spacious feeling possible while not rejecting privacy where needed. In the absence of walls as room makers/dividers, the functional fixtures play a crucial role in space planning and the aesthetics of the whole. They become architectural elements. These pieces of furniture are conceptualized as individual prefab units, equipped with essential functions for small-scale urban living, potentially applicable to various other sites, while adjustable to specific conditions.Save this picture!Save this picture!The essence of materiality is fully exposed. The floor is light beige linoleum. The fixture units are constructed of structural clear-coated plywood, exposing their layered edges. The distinct coloring aims to break the box-like volume into planes, and allow more flexibility and freedom by making object selection not too restricted, as opposed to having a monotonous ambience.Save this picture! Project gallerySee allShow less Project locationAddress:Ari, Bangkok, ThailandLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address.About this officebunoOffice••• Published on May 25, 2025Cite: "MM33 Apartment / buno" 25 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030326/mm33-apartment-buno&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

Mid-Century & Mid-Western: Tracing the Modernist Movement in America’s Industrial CorridorSave this picture!United States Chicago Federal Center by Mies van der Rohe. Image © Samuel LudwigThe Mid-Century Modernist movement was more than an aesthetic or material shift in the United States, as it was a response to a rapidly changing world. Emerging after World War II, this architectural revolution rejected ornate, traditional styles of the past in favor of clean lines, functional design, and incorporation of flashy materials like steel, glass, and concrete. Modernism was a break from tradition, focusing instead on simplicity, efficiency, and a vision for the future. It reflected the optimism of a nation rebuilding itself, where technology and innovation shaped everything from cityscapes to suburban homes.Open floor plans, large windows, flat roofs, and the integration of interior and exterior spaces characterized mid-century modernism in the United States. Buildings were designed with functionality in mind, stripped of unnecessary ornamentation, and adapted to the needs of a modern, postwar society. These structures often blurred the boundaries between architecture and landscape, seeking harmony with their surroundings rather than imposing on them. From the glass-and-steel towers of Chicago to the minimalist ranch homes in California, this movement redefined what it meant to live in the modern world.While cities like New York and Los Angeles are often associated with Mid-Century Modernism, the Midwest played a pivotal role in shaping the movement across the country. Some of the most influential modernist architects found their canvas in this region, using the Midwest's urban and rural landscapes to explore new architectural possibilities. From skyscrapers in Chicago to churches in small towns like Columbus, Indiana, the Midwest was a fertile ground for architectural innovation. Related Article Mid-Century Modernism and East Coast Ruralism: A Study of Adaptive Design An Urban Epicenter of Post-War Modernism in Chicago, Illinois Save this picture!It is impossible to exclude Chicago from the conversation of modernism in North America. It stands, even today, as a city whose relationship with modernism was more symbiotic than incidental. The city's long history of architectural innovation laid the groundwork for the birth of the Mid-Century Modern movement, which took off in the aftermath of World War II. Famously admired as the birthplace of modern skyscraper design and home to pioneers like Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright, Chicago was uniquely positioned to embrace the principles of the International Style, perfected by Mies van der Rohe.The arrival of Mies van der Rohe at the Illinois Institute of Technology in the 1930s marked a pivotal moment for the city. Mies's architectural philosophy, characterized by minimalist forms and an emphasis on new industrial materials like steel and glass, found a perfect outlet in Chicago's rapidly evolving urban landscape. His designs, such as the Lake Shore Drive Apartments (1951) and Crown Hall (1956), broke from the past, rejecting ornamentation in favor of structure as the form of beauty. These buildings were more than just physical structures—they were a new way of seeing the world that blended art and function into an elegant whole.Save this picture!Chicago's embrace of modernism wasn't just theoretical but intensely practical. The John Hancock Center by SOM (1970), with its bold tapering shape and integrated design, embodied the city's ongoing transformation. These skyscrapers weren't just symbols of wealth—they represented a forward-thinking, industrial city reinventing itself in the face of postwar change. Modernism in Chicago was about making a statement, about pushing the boundaries of what was possible, and the skyline became an urban laboratory for this new architectural philosophy.An Unexpected Modernist Haven in Columbus, IndianaSave this picture!Modernism in the Midwest wasn't only defined by the sprawling urban landscapes. Small-town America, too, embraced the movement with a surprising fervor, most notably in Columbus, Indiana. A town of less than 50,000, Columbus became an unlikely hub of modernist architecture, thanks to the vision of J. Irwin Miller, the CEO of Cummins Engine Company.Miller was convinced that architecture could be a tool for civic pride, and he set out to bring some of the world's greatest architects to his hometown. This endeavor transformed Columbus into an architectural mecca, attracting renowned figures like Eliel Saarinen, I.M. Pei, and Richard Meier. These architects didn't just design buildings—they shaped a new identity for the town, infusing it with the spirit of Mid-Century Modernism. One of the town's most notable landmarks, the First Christian Church (1942), designed by Eliel Saarinen, is a stunning example of how modernism could transform sacred spaces. The church's minimalist design, with its soaring concrete arches and light-filled interior, departs from traditional religious architecture, yet remains deeply spiritual in its simplicity.Save this picture!But Columbus didn't just embrace modernism in its public buildings. It influenced the narrative and construction of its schools, libraries, and bus stations. By the 1970s, the town had more modernist structures per capita than any other place in the United States. Columbus is a perfect example of how modernism transcended urban centers and became a way of life in a small Midwestern town, elevating everyday spaces and embedding a sense of future-oriented civic pride into the region's identity.Rural Mid-Century Modernism in Small-Town AmericaSave this picture!While Chicago and Columbus may stand as the most iconic expressions of Mid-Century Modernism in the Midwest, the movement's influence rippled through even the most rural corners of the region. In towns like Mason City, Iowa, and Fort Wayne, Indiana, the modernist ideals of simplicity, openness, and functionality weren't just limited to grand urban projects. They found their way into everyday life, shaping residential homes, schools, libraries, civic buildings, and community infrastructure. Unlike the towering skyscrapers and bold public spaces in Chicago or Columbus, the rural examples of Mid-Century Modernism were more modest in scale. Still, they reflected the same commitment to clean lines, efficient design, and environmental integration.Take, for example, the Frank Lloyd Wright-designed Prairie School houses in Mason City, Iowa. With their flat rooflines, wide overhangs, and open, flowing interiors, these homes captured the essence of Mid-Century Modern design, breaking away from traditional boxed-in rooms to create spaces that were expansive and connected to nature. While these houses were private homes, they served as a microcosm of the broader Mid-Century ethos, embracing local materials, blending with the landscape, and using design to enhance the quality of life. Wright's work in Mason City reflects how Mid-Century Modernism did not answer only to aesthetics, but to the ideologies of designing spaces that are simple, functional, and intrinsically linked to their environmental context.Save this picture!Beyond architecture, the principles of Mid-Century Modernism began to permeate every facet of design in these rural communities. The same values that shaped the homes and schools of the region also influenced furniture design, product design, and even infrastructure. In small towns, schools were designed with expansive glass windows to foster openness and connect students to the natural world outside. At the same time, the clean lines of modernist furniture became commonplace in local homes, offering simplicity and functionality. Schools in Fort Wayne, like those designed by the notable architect Eero Saarinen, incorporated modernist elements such as open, flexible spaces that could adapt to the needs of students, reflecting the movement's broader aim of creating environments that encouraged collaboration, innovation, and community.Moreover, Mid-Century Modernism in rural areas extended into urban planning and community infrastructure—with designs focused on efficiency, accessibility, and a seamless integration with the natural landscape. Roads, parks, and even public transportation in these small towns were planned with an emphasis on simplicity and clarity of form, ensuring that the built environment was not an imposition, but a complement to the natural surroundings. Urban planners in small towns embraced the modernist ideal that architecture and design should serve the community as a backdrop to daily life and a means to enrich it.Save this picture!In these Midwestern towns, the modernist movement was not simply a top-down trend but a deeply ingrained part of the local culture, resonating with residents' desire for a forward-thinking yet regionally grounded approach to life. The Mid-Century ideals of openness, simplicity, and a connection to nature found expression not just in towering civic buildings or sweeping urban parks, but in the very fabric of small-town life. Here, modernism was not about creating grand, world-changing gestures—it was about designing for the people, in the here and now, with an eye toward the future, and understanding the past. This local adaptation of modernist principles shows how the movement's philosophy could be realized at any scale, and how rural America embraced a movement that was fundamentally about making life simpler, more efficient, and more beautiful.Scales of Mid-Century Modernism in the MidwestSave this picture!Mid-century modernism in the Midwestern states refused to be confined by scale, geography, or urban context. It remains proof that modern architecture was not the exclusive realm of sprawling cities or privileged elites. Instead, it was a versatile and democratic force in sprawling urban contexts and furniture design decisions.The beauty of mid-century modernism in the Midwest lies in its ability to translate the ideals of openness, simplicity, and functionality into various forms. The movement reshaped the Midwestern landscape at every level through monumental civic buildings, streamlined homes, or sleek furniture designs, from the grandest civic gestures to the most miniature everyday objects. In this multi-scaled application of modernism, the heart of the Midwest's architectural legacy truly shines.Save this picture!As cities and towns across the region look to the future, the lessons of this movement offer valuable insight into creating functional spaces that reflect a community's spirit and aspirations. However, preserving these structures remains a contested issue, with some modernist landmarks lost to time while others are finally recognized for their cultural and architectural significance. This ongoing conversation about preservation speaks to the broader legacy of the movement.Ultimately, the Midwest's embrace of Mid-Century Modernism stands as a testament to an era marked by optimism, forward-thinking, and a profound belief in the potential of design to shape everyday life. In the industrial heartland of the United States, modernism adopted a vision for a future that was accessible, scalable, and grounded in the values of simplicity, function, and beauty. Related Article Mid-Century Modernism and East Coast Ruralism: A Study of Adaptive Design Image gallerySee allShow less About this authorOlivia PostonAuthor••• Cite: Olivia Poston. "Mid-Century & Mid-Western: Tracing the Modernist Movement in America’s Industrial Corridor" 25 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1026454/mid-century-and-mid-western-tracing-scales-of-the-modernist-movement-in-americas-industrial-corridor&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

What just happened? The Hanover Administrative Court has issued a ruling that sharpens digital privacy protections in Germany. The decision requires websites to offer users a clear, easy, and genuine choice on cookie consent. Manipulative consent banners that push users toward accepting cookies are not just unfair – they violate German and European data protection laws. Lower Saxony Data Protection Officer Denis Lehmkemper has won a legal battle in his push for fairer digital privacy practices in Germany. The Hanover Administrative Court ruled that websites must display a clearly visible "reject all" button on cookie banners if they offer an "accept all" option. The recently unsealed March 19 decision aims to curb manipulative designs that pressure users into consenting to cookies and reinforces the principle that users deserve a clear, genuine choice. The case that led to this landmark decision centered on the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung (NOZ), a major media company in Lower Saxony. Lehmkemper's office ordered NOZ to redesign its cookie banner, arguing it failed to obtain valid, informed, and voluntary user consent before placing cookies and processing personal data. NOZ challenged the order, insisting its consent process was effective, did not involve personal data processing, and that cookie compliance was outside the data protection authority's jurisdiction. After reviewing the case, the court sided with the data protection authority. Judges ruled that NOZ's cookie banner made rejecting cookies significantly harder than accepting them. Users faced repeated consent prompts, and the banner's language – such as the headline "optimal user experience" and the "accept and close" button – misled users. It omitted any mention of the word "consent," and buried information about third-party partners and cross-border data transfers behind scrolling. The court concluded that NOZ failed to obtain the informed, voluntary, and unambiguous consent required under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It ruled that consent secured through manipulative design is invalid, violating both the Telecommunications Digital Services Data Protection Act and the GDPR. The judgment reinforces that websites must not nudge users into agreeing to cookies or make refusal unnecessarily difficult. Instead, the option to reject all must be as prominent and accessible as "accept all." Lehmkemper welcomed the court's ruling, hoping it would set a precedent for other website operators. He acknowledged that many find cookie banners frustrating but emphasized their importance in safeguarding online privacy. The decision should prompt more providers to adopt consent solutions that comply with data protection standards. // Related Stories Recent audits by data protection authorities, such as the Bavarian State Office for Data Protection Supervision, found many websites still use cookie banners that fall short of legal standards, often making it easier to accept cookies than to reject them. The Hanover court's ruling should push website operators to improve consent mechanisms and uphold online privacy rights.