ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations after signing

2010-10-15 05:16:51
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

Levine wrote:
Aw, come on.  How many millions of people still use Outlook Express on
Windows XP?  Switching MUAs is painful, people rarely do it.

...meaning MUA developers won't bother to do something about 
it once the attack is plainly visible and they're used as 
examples, because since users won't switch anyway, there's no motivation?

The backend will address it first before the MUA needs too.

Murray, most people are not haters and don't draw a line between good 
and bad because one isn't perfect and therefore begin to "switch" 
software like cheap wine.

Since DKIM is betting its future on increase mail integrity and 
verified identities, it is a fundamental requirement that it checks 
key parts to make sure the integrity stays in tack.   Passing the buck 
(or assuming others are better suited to deal with it) is not 
practical and bad PR for DKIM.

In reality, all parts need to check for this, the MUAs, the backends 
and above all because of the extra special needs for trust - DKIM.

The backends can't presume all the different MUAs used will address 
this, so it needs to address it.

The DKIM components can't assume the backend or MUAs will address it, 
so it needs to address it itself.

-- 
HLS


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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>