At 09:47 24-02-10, Michael Thomas wrote:
The thing that I'm skeptical about is that an automaton can be programmed
to do this sort of analysis with any sort of accuracy. We're talking about
a potential flood of reports coming in, I assume, so I doubt we're all going
to be putting out job reqs for "DKIM Signature Breakage Analysis Engineer".
There were far too many breakages even with tools and hunches that were very
difficult to figure out, and even then there were lots of mysteries.
I guess that it is all about determining whether the number of
reports points to a significant problem. Murray mentioned the z= tag
( http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2010q1/012988.html ). It's
useful to catch obvious causes of DKIM verification failures. I
agree that there is too much breakage for automated analysis.
But I guess this all rather begs the question about what people intend to
do with those breakage stats and/or analysis.
Personally, it is useful to fix bugs and improve the implementation.
At 08:54 24-02-10, Mark Delany wrote:
It got a luke-warm response a few years back, but now that a lot more
people are having to deal with "why did the verify failed", is it
worth re-vivifying the DKIM-Trace stuff, or whatever it was called
back then? We found it very useful for our early days of interop
testing.
I recall seeing the header for DomainKeys.
The idea is pretty simple: The signer adds a header that characterizes
the content before and after canonicalization. The verifier performs
the same characterization and compares the differences. The
characterizations we used at the time were simple character counts
represented in a relatively compressed form (27 a's, 60 b's, 40LFs,
50spaces, etc)
Do you have any documentation for that? As a non-WG comment, I doubt
that the before and after capture would catch the useful cases due to
rewrites and other changes done in some environments.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html