ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Seeking Clarification of the l= Tag

2013-08-04 15:39:19
There are few details I'd like to clarify.

Body hash for this message is correctly computed by the sender.
Entire signature of this message in fact valid - this is why Port25,
Gmail, and Mail.dll validate DKIM signature with 'pass' result.

The only problem is the value of l= parameter of DKIM-Signature header (l=2).
The value is greater than total number of bytes after body
canonicalization (0 bytes).
This is easy to spot and all parsers simply ignore incorrect l= value.
Hash is computed for entire canonicalized body (of length 0).

Now the question is should the validation fail or pass in such case?

--
Best regards,
Pawel Lesnikowski
http://www.limilabs.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

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