Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The question remains: given a message with such a signature, which is
entirely valid in the current DKIM, what will a recipient system do
with it? What will users see? Ask ten people, get ten answers, which
is about as far from interoperable as you can get.
I think the use of "interoperability" here is curious. What qualifies as
interoperable? According to the DKIM spec, if sizeof(message) = 10k and
l=100, then if the first 100 bytes were unchanged since signing, the
signature is valid, and I think everyone would agree that the verifiers would
all behave the same way.
You might get ten answers if you're asking about assessors, but I doubt you'd
get ten answers when you're talking about verifiers.
Which is all that DKIM ever promised. This entire line of argument is highly
specious. Somebody's lack of imagination is not the gold standard.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html