ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] The URL to my paper describing the DKIM policy options

2006-07-26 09:27:26
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 11:54, Bill(_dot_)Oxley(_at_)cox(_dot_)com wrote:
Scott,
I think that each domain would have a public key and the aggregator MTA
that is shared would sign on behalf of that domain
Jobob.com uses mx.isp.com to send mail
jobob.com would have a dns record containing public key information
mx.isp.com would sign using jobob.com keys.

Now conversely keeping jobob.com keys updated in a timely manner would
be time consuming so perhaps isp.com would have a policy that
I sign all mail
And maintain a single record. This would be trivially spoofable until
the message hits the verifier which would then fail the signature.

And this is where there might be a complexity trade-off that is worth 
considering.

If our policy protocol gives jobob.com the ability to say "all mail is signed 
and the signer is isp.com" then the need for the added management complexity 
associated with multiple keys for multiple domains on the same host is 
mitigated.  

It is, of course, important to note that this would place a requirement on 
isp.com to ensure that messages it signed on behalf of jobob.com really were 
from jobob.com.  

Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

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