ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] user level ssp

2006-09-06 17:54:41
Douglas Otis:

On Sep 6, 2006, at 4:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:

Jim Fenton:
The aspect of user-level SSP that concerns me equally is the  
transaction load.  When user-level SSP is "turned on", the  
verifier MUST query for a user-level record in addition to the  
domain-level record.  User-level queries are not as effectively  
cached, since these are queries for individual addresses, not  
domains.

Could someone please explain the nature of the problem that would  
exist when these (financial) institutions can't selectively add  
DKIM signatures to outbound email? Engineering is about balance,  
but I haven't heard enough to make the trade off yet.

An institution that signs all their messages may wish to restrict  

No offense intended, but I had hoped that someone else could answer
the question, instead of the one voice that I hear advocating this
item several times a day.

With per-user records in the DNS, should we not be worried about  
brute-force attacks to guess email addresses?

Why?  The signature must be valid and the email-address must be  
assured to be valid.  How is the email-address susceptible?

I can answer that. Exploitation of the mapping from recipient
address to DNS record name, by the application of brute force.

I expect that hammering a DNS server would be much faster and much
stealthier than hammering an SMTP server.

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

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