ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures

2006-04-04 15:18:27
At 10:59 PM +0100 4/4/06, Stephen Farrell wrote:
If no-one wants to insist on signatures having to be sequential,
then this could be fairly easy!

Signatures have to be sequential if you sign them, given our current rules for signing and verifying h=. The question is whether or not we care about the cases where multiple signed headers get reordered, thus breaking the signature.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>