On 16/Sep/10 01:31, Hector Santos wrote:
Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Abstract:
DKIM Joint Signatures provides a means to limit the responsibility of
a message that implied by signing it, and possibly transfer the
responsibility to a third party.
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-vesely-dkim-joint-sigs-00.txt
The I-D lacks examples to better understand this proposal.
I see these generic possibilities:
First party Example:
From: user(_at_)example(_dot_)com
DKIM-Required: example.com
DKIM-Signature: d=example.com h="From:DKIM-Required"
Yes, that's possible, but seems useless. What I've been thinking about is
From: user(_at_)example(_dot_)com
DKIM-Required: list.example
DKIM-Signature: d=example.com h="From:DKIM-Required"
If it were agreed that a signature may be not valid unless
countersigned by the recipient, the risk of replay attacks would be
greatly diminished.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html