On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy
That's contrary to normal use of the term third-party, as there
is no third party involved in this example - there's me and my
domain, and there's the recipient.
How is a piece of software supposed to detect and apply that? As soon as you
make that > allowance, then one could argue we should also have a heuristic
to say "yahoo.co.uk" and > "yahoo.com" are related and should share a
I don't think Steve is saying that you do. I believe the point is that
people equate foo.com and a.foo.com as the same party. In many cases
this will be true. Before I posted my message, I had someone say how
did a.foo.com suddenly become 3rd party of foo.com? That wasn't that
person's understanding of it nor of other folks.
If we describe that as a third-party signature we risk confusing
it with the case of a true third-party signature from a certification
authority or some such. "Third-party that's the author"
vs "Third-party that's not the author".
There's only confusion when we pile adjectives onto the end. It's
third-party, or it's not. Or > since some people like ADSP's terms: It's an
author signature, or it's not.
I am much happier with ADSP's terms. I'm still fairly certain folks
come to different conclusions regarding the term 3rd party.
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to