May be stupid question: Would these stats help to build a reputation on the
domain?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk(_at_)cloudmark(_dot_)com>
To: "IETF-DKIM" <ietf-dkim(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, 26 March, 2010 10:25:33 AM
Subject: [ietf-dkim] Collecting statistics
I’ve got as a task for the next major OpenDKIM release a reworking of our
statistics collection component. This is something that’s off by default; one
must specifically enable it both at compile time and at run time.
What I’m considering is a change to the code so that it collects a larger set
of interesting things instead of just pass/fail counts, which canonicalizations
are in use, what signing algorithm is in use, whether or not “l=” is in use,
and the date/time a domain was last seen. Some of the data I’m looking at
collecting include:
- On failure, whether or not the “bh” matched (so you can tell whether it was a
body change or a header change that broke it)
- On failure, if “z=” was present, record the name of the header(s) that were
changed
- Use of g=, t= in keys
- Use of x=, t=, z=, l= in signatures
- If l= was used, how often extra data was present
- Count of times t= was used and contained a future timestamp
- Count of retrieved key records that contained a syntax error
- Count of signatures referencing nonexistent keys
- ADSP statistics
- Count of third-party signatures
- Count of messages containing multiple signatures
For those of you thinking about statistics regarding DKIM, have I missed any
that might be useful to the working group?
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html