ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] canonicalized null body and dkim

2007-01-08 13:59:24


--On January 8, 2007 11:51:13 AM +0000 Charles Lindsey <chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:

On Sun, 07 Jan 2007 18:49:50 -0000, Eric Allman
<eric+dkim(_at_)sendmail(_dot_)org>  wrote:

I have (finally) managed to slog my way through all the messages
on this   topic.  Let me start out by saying that I don't see the
ambiguity in the   current text:

        If there is no trailing CRLF on the message, a CRLF is
        added. It makes no other changes to the message body. In
        more formal terms, the "simple" body canonicalization
        algorithm converts "0*CRLF" at the end of the body to a
        single "CRLF".

...

Indeed there is no ambiguity in that, but that is because you have
only  quoted half the text. The full text is:

    The "simple" body canonicalization algorithm ignores all empty
lines
    at the end of the message body.  An empty line is a line of zero
    length after removal of the line terminator.  If there is no
trailing
    CRLF on the message, a CRLF is added.  It makes no other
changes to
    the message body.  In more formal terms, the "simple" body
    canonicalization algorithm converts "0*CRLF" at the end of the
body
    to a single "CRLF".

Observe carefully that the text some times tells you to consider
the  "message", and somtimes the "message body" (which I take to
mean exactly  the <body>, if any, defined by RFC 2822).

OK, I'll change the single instance of "message" to "message body".

Consider the example, in DATA format:

    Field: foobar<CRLF>.
    <CRLF>
    <CRLF>
    .<CRLF>

The ".<CRLF>" is evidently not a part of either the message or of
the  message body. The "message body" consists of "<CRLF>". Let us
apply the  sentences of 3.4.3 one by one.

As Hector points out, this is not a valid 2822 message to begin with, so sending it would be undefined. At that point how it gets canonicalized is the least of your problems.

I can't come up with a scenario that starts with a valid message that has the problem you describe. None the less, changing "message" to "message body" will improve consistency, and it would make interpretation of this degenerate case consistent.

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