[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
I have been struggling with the use of "authenticate" and "authorize"
ever since I started working on IIM. I had a different
notion there --
that one authenticated the message (with the help of the
included key)
and then checked the authorization of the private key holder to send
mail. But that taxonomy doesn't really help here.
The data stored in the DNS is syntactically identical to an
authorization record. The problem is provenance. Consider the following
Aardvark.com sends to Bobble.com
bobble.com accepts the email from Aardvark
Spamalot.com sends to Bobble.com
bobble.com rejects the spam
The problem with calling the record 'authorization' is that this is
exclusively the right of the recipient. Bobble.com is not using the data
sent from spamalot.com as authorization data.
In fact what Bobble.com actually does is to use the key record AND the
policy record as credentials:
A) The key record is used to authenticate signed mail
B) The policy record is used to reject unsigned mail
A and B are both answering the question 'is this message authentic'.
I have often thought that we need to invent or appropriate
other words
to describe what we're doing here because "authenticate" is usually
applied to a human, not a message. Any ideas?
The term policy is well established in the litterature. Matt Blaze used
the term in Policymaker ten years ago, I don't think that was the first
use of the term either.
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org