On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 05:53:58 +0100, Murray S. Kucherawy
<msk(_at_)cloudmark(_dot_)com> wrote:
Actually, let me revise that a bit:
"Agents that evaluate or apply DKIM output need to be aware that a DKIM
signer can sign messages that are malformed (e.g., violate RFC5322), or
become malformed in transit, or contain content that is not true or
valid. Such an action might constitute an attack against a receiver,
especially where additional credence is incorrectly given to a signed
message without evaluation of the signer. Moreover, an agent would be
incorrect to infer that all instances of a header field are signed just
because one is. Agents will need to account for these issues when
deciding how to apply DKIM results to message, especially when
displaying them to users."
OK, there is much good stuff in that. In particular, it makes it clear
that Bad Stuff can originate from the signer as well as from
men-in-the-middle and replayers. But I am still concerned that multiple
occurrences of "singleton" headers fields are not explicitly mentioned,
even as just one possible example. So perhaps, just before the last
sentence:
"... , in particular if that field was not supposed to occur more than
once."
After all, you were seemingly happy to mention that particular trap in
8.14 in draft-12.
Not sure about the word "incorrectly", but s/without evaluation/without
adequate evaluation/ might make your point better. Though I expect, of the
millions of perfectly legitimate domains that will exist without special
recognition in any reputation system, it will be hard to spot a newly
appearing 'badguy' one.
I still don't think that paragraph is what we really need, but I will
withold judgement on that until I see how it gets incorporated into the
other bits of text that are around.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131
Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html