ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] yet more of the usual list nonsense, was suspicious

2007-10-12 04:45:24
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:40:54 +0100, John Levine <johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

Well, if we assume that we can wave our wand and assume that there are
DKIM signatures on usenet messages, which seems unlikely anytime soon,
they wouldn't survive a gateway to e-mail anyway since the headers,
although similar, are not identical.

Actually, DKIM should work quite well on Usenet if anyone wants to use it (quite a lot of posters routinely sign their articles with PGP, which makes them difficult to spoof).

And I don't see why the DKIM signature should not survive the gateway unless the gateway did something really stupid like removing the Newsgroups header (which would quite likely be signed, but is quite harmless if left in an email - enables people to see that it was originally a Usenet article). And the Gateway would be even stupider if it tried to alter the From, Message-Id, Date, etc which are the same in both media. There might be trouble if it tried to replace any Sender header with itself.

A DKIM based filter could work at the gateway, in either direction.
That would be a swell place to check signatures.

Indeed so.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131     Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html