ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Everything not forbidden is permitted

2009-08-03 20:33:32
The near issue has already come up and the end-result - NO.  A 
customer was asked by their direct marketing spammer to add DKIM/DKEY 
records because YAHOO was forcing the issue on the spammer to access 
YAHOO recipients.

They wanted to signed:

       coupons.majorcompany.com

and ask the company to add DNS selector records.  But the major 
company did have a way to stop fake or 3rd party

       majorcompany.com
       dept.majorcompany.com
       services.majorcompany.com

signatures once bad guys learned that the domain was being signed!

Since DKIM lacks fault detection, the answer was no.

-- 
HLS


Steve Atkins wrote:

Chatting with people offlist the issue of whether there is such a  
thing as a good or bad DKIM record came up.

I'm trying to get a feel for peoples views on that so, to give a  
concrete example, if your postmaster came to you with this DKIM record  
they wanted you to publish in DNS, would you publish it as-is? If not,  
why not?

september2006._domainkey.example.com 300 IN TXT "version=DKIM1; a=rsa- 
sha1; c=simple/simple; hash=sha1; t=testing; p=MIGfMA0G<more base64  
gunk>;"

Cheers,
   Steve


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