Dave Crocker wrote:
Paul Hoffman wrote:
However, using such limits enables an attack in which a sender with
malicious intent modifies a message to include content that solely
benefits the attacker. It is possible for the appended content to
completely replace the original content in the end recipient's eyes and
to defeat duplicate message detection algorithms....
(dhc) I think the use of "sender" here refers to the signer, but it might
refer to the originator. I'm not sure. Who is really the source of the
threat?
It seems to be clearly that "sender" means "attacker" here. sender ->
attacker
hmm. yeah. but i guess the interesting part is that it means an entity that
handles the message after signing but before delivery. that means it is some
sort of post-signing intermediary (ummm, sender...)
Agree with Paul's comment. I'd just change the word; we don't need to
delve into what sort of attacker we're talking about here.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html