On 07/23/2012 06:13 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
That customer brought up an interesting point. "t=y" could also be useful
for messages whose signatures do verify. Specifically, it could be used by
a signer to say "It's possible this message shouldn't have been signed by
us. Please don't give it any preferential treatment based on our name's
reputation if the signature verifies, which could then tarnish our
reputation."
But more to the point, it seems that this isn't a specific "we're
testing our system" issue, but a separate issue related to reputation:
"Do not use signatures made with this key as input to your evaluation
of our reputation." It would seem best to propose a new tag, in a
DKIM extension, for that purpose, rather than re-using and overloading
t=.
There seems like there are many things wrong with this sort of
"helpfulness". If a given selector is dodgy, the reputation system
should figure that out for itself. Believing even a vaguely
positive-assertion from the source is almost certainly a mistake,
and likely to be gamed if you do.
Mike
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html