ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue: Section 8.1 Misuse Of Body Limit - Needs some Insight here!

2007-01-23 17:38:27
Hector Santos wrote:

I vote for a new corresponding key tag, "l=" in section 3.6 Key Management and Representation.

   l=  Defines whole or partial hashing of body

       w   The entire body is hashed (default). The
           DKIM-Signature: l= tag may be omitted or defined
           with the full body length.

       p   Partial hashing allowed.

       #   If a number is defined, this is the MINIMUM bytes
           allowed to hashed.

Again, I'm just winging it and I hope some doc person can do a better job. I personally prefer the default to be entire body hashing.

I disagree with the need for this. If the domain administration trusts someone to apply a signature for a domain, they should be trusted to abide by rules the domain sets for the signature: proper use (or non-use) of l=, what header fields to sign, etc. If they can't be trusted to do this right, they shouldn't be trusted to sign at all.

This is different from the specification of the hash and signature algorithms in the key record, since the use of too-weak algorithms might (at some point in the future, presumably) allow someone not authorized at all to apply a valid signature.

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