ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] summarizing my understanding of the errata discussion & a proposal

2009-02-05 10:52:19

On Feb 5, 2009, at 3:36 AM, Charles Lindsey wrote:

First, I stuck to terminology that was in RFC 4871 intentionally,  
with an eye toward keeping the errata simple.

Yes, but we are currently discussing Dave's errata, which carefully  
distinguishes between the Verifier, which does the purely machanical  
checking of the signature for validity, and the Assessor which  
decides  what action to take on the result.

This new function called the Identity Assessor for DKIM would  
presumably be focused on identities.  For DKIM, it might determine  
which portion of an email-address gets highlighted.

When the i= field _exactly_ matches with an email-address contained  
within a signed header field, this entire email-address could be  
safely highlighted.

The statement within Section 9 of the Errata prevents being able to  
provide this feature.
,---
Hence, DKIM delivers to receive-side Identity Assessors responsible  
Identifiers that are individual, opaque values. Their sub-structures  
and particular semantics are not publicly defined and, therefore,  
cannot be assumed by an Identity Assessor.
'---

Statements that imply the i= value is always OPAQUE prevents its  
utilization for highlighting purposes with respect to identity  
assurances, even when there is an exact match and this value could be  
said to not be opaque. This also seems to conflict with the defined  
use of the i= value as representing on whose behalf the signature was  
added.  There should be an exception spelled out for exact matches.


Such as:

Hence, DKIM delivers to receive-side Identity Assessors responsible  
Identifiers that are individual, where unless the AUID exactly matches  
a signed header's email-address, is to be considered an opaque value.   
Being opaque means the AUID sub-structures, and particular semantics,  
are not publicly defined and, therefore, cannot be assumed by an  
Identity Assessor.

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

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