On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Tony Hansen <tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com> wrote:
Absolutely. This really has nothing to do with increasing or decreasing the
likelihood of a message making it to the mailbox. It has to do with being
able to make additional positive value judgements about messages that *have*
made it to your inbox. People keep incorrectly conflating the making of
positive statements about a message with trying to keep messages from the
inbox; such thinking is what leads to such erroneous documents as
"dkim-is-harmful".
DKIM shines with telling you positive verifiable statements about an email
message and its attributes. It's the messages that pass those positive
verifications that I'm interested in for such additional tests.
Dear Tony,
What do you find to be in error in draft-otis-dkim-harmful? The latest version
attempts to more clearly explain this concern.
Trust in a DKIM signature is being used as a basis for acceptance as described
in section 5.4 in [RFC5863]. Since neither SMTP nor DKIM check for invalid
prefixed header fields, TBTB domains offer a simple means for malefactors to
have their deceptive messages delivered to their victim's inbox. This problem
is real.
Regards,
Douglas Otis
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html