ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim service

2005-10-17 16:23:06
william(at)elan.net wrote:


On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Jim Fenton wrote:

Mail list is "3rd party" for message signature only if it does not set Sender field to itself, which most mail lists actually do. If mail list does add Sender it can be viewed as "2nd party" to the message but I'm of the opinion that "1st party" signature (i.e. added by original message author as listed in From header field) should survive mail list processing too and is as important as mail list added signature. But I maybe looking at it all in the METASIG identity perspective rather then the one you're taking with DKIM (which I still don't understand because the original goal of all the work was to stop spoofing of visible headers and is to me most important and some here seem to have forgotten it).


Have another look at the SSP specification, section 2.1. The only time that the Sender field matters at all (and it's extremely rare) is when the From address contains multiple mailbox specifications. In that case the Sender field is used as a "tiebreaker", as spelled out in RFC 2822 section 3.6.2.


Is that the same as saying that for purposes of forgery protection (rather then establishing "some" identity for reputation/accreditation by means of the signature) DKIM focuses only on the "From" header field?

[Yes I understand its not 100% only from in case of multiple addresses]

Yes, although I'm reluctant to use the term "forgery" because it means different things to different people. We are not providing a signature from the author him/herself, so it could be argued that we aren't providing forgery protection at all.


So even if the mailing list does set the Sender field, it does not change the fact that the mailing list signature is a third-party signature.


In that case I'd expect that you should try to make sure the signature
from original sender (ok - from person listed in From) survives cases
of mail lists and instead I hear some people on this list saying that
we should not even try.

This is a difficult question, because anything we do to accommodate mailing lists introduces new vulnerabilities. Anything that accommodates the addition of ads by mailing lists (since some are advertising-supported) also accommodates the addition of undesirable content to messages, unless you know exactly who the "good" mailing lists are. Since new mailing lists are being created all the time, it's very difficult to know which ones are "good", especially when performing verification for an entire domain.


It would need to change the From field to do that. So, in fact, we are concentrating on visible headers.


Sender is visible header on nuber of mail clients and definetly on

50% of the ones if counted based on actual use by people. Actually

the situation is such that those for who its not visible header field,
can very often change it to make it visible through some additional seetting and at the same time they are also the ones that are a lot
less likely to be fooled by forgery in the first place...

The people we're trying to help are the ones who won't can't do that additional setting to make Sender visible. And I'm not satisfied with helping 50% of the clients.

-Jim
_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org