ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures

2007-01-04 10:39:34
John L wrote:
I think that we all agree that if the intermediate system re-signed the message and we trust that signature, the message is OK. But the discussion in progress is, as far as I can tell, about messages where an intermediate system modified but did not re-sign.

I don't think it's at all clear which is the preferred poison. In your case, I'd need to keep a list of domains that I trust, for some value of trust. That's rather daunting in all but the smallest of scales. In the other case, I'd need to either analyze the appended content, or keep around another list of what is and is not a valid transformation. The latter sounds very similar in scope to the re-sign case, while the former is something that spam scanners do in spades today. The other aspect of all of this is that the fate-sharing on the resign case is all wrong: when I decide to accept/not accept a message with modifications, I control my destiny. When I wait for lists to resign, I wait and I wait and I wait...

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