ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Final update to 4871bis for working group review

2011-07-07 21:34:22
On 7/7/11 3:21 PM, John Levine wrote:
Will your "assume one more From than listed in h=" lead to failed
verifications on messages that actually follow the advice in the RFC
to list duplicate headers in their h= values?
The RFC also says you shouldn't sign messages that aren't RFC 2822.  So
pick your poison.

I have to say it's a little surreal to have these arguments about what
changes to make to avoid the horrors of a duplicate From: attack that
is and likely will always be entirely hypothetical, when we can't even
get our act together to deprecate the l= option, including l=0.
John,

When a domain is found using the l=0 option, this provides a basis to 
assign the domain with no positive reputation.  In other words, this 
domain's signature can not be a basis for acceptance hence reputation is 
able to cure this ill.

The specification of SHOULD ensure messages are RFC5322 valid must not 
imply there are also valid reasons where these messages need not comply 
with checks for multiple header fields limited to single occurrences.  
There is no reason to have these checks be an optional configuration as 
they are in OpenDKIM.  In light of conversations by influential 
individuals that DKIM verifier's role is NOT to make these checks, it 
therefore becomes essential to clarify the specifics of this particular 
requirement as a MUST.

Skipping these checks invites harm.   In addition, these checks have not 
been defined as the duty of SMTP.  Also, the DKIM verifier making this 
check will not assure RFC5322 compliance, since not reporting a valid 
signature is to be considered not being signed.  The difference is that 
acceptance based upon trust given a signing domain is not easily 
exploited when these checks are made by the DKIM verifier.  
Unfortunately, the norm is not to make these checks because only DKIM 
invites the possible exploit.  DKIM MUST accept the role of preventing 
the exploit it invites.

-Doug

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

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