Murray, Tony, or someone else: Can you independently check that these
examples need the extra space in order to be verified correctly?
Assuming they do, this errata report should be marked "Verified", but
the type should be changed to "Editorial", not "Technical".
Barry
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 10:17 AM, RFC Errata System
<rfc-editor(_at_)rfc-editor(_dot_)org> wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6376,
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures".
--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6376&eid=4926
--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Simon Ser <simon(_dot_)ser(_at_)emersion(_dot_)fr>
Section: A.2, A.3
Original Text
-------------
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=brisbane; d=example.com;
c=simple/simple; q=dns/txt; i=joe(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com;
h=Received : From : To : Subject : Date : Message-ID;
bh=2jUSOH9NhtVGCQWNr9BrIAPreKQjO6Sn7XIkfJVOzv8=;
b=AuUoFEfDxTDkHlLXSZEpZj79LICEps6eda7W3deTVFOk4yAUoqOB
4nujc7YopdG5dWLSdNg6xNAZpOPr+kHxt1IrE+NahM6L/LbvaHut
KVdkLLkpVaVVQPzeRDI009SO2Il5Lu7rDNH6mZckBdrIx0orEtZV
4bmp/YzhwvcubU4=;
Received: from client1.football.example.com [192.0.2.1]
by submitserver.example.com with SUBMISSION;
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe SixPack <joe(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com>
To: Suzie Q <suzie(_at_)shopping(_dot_)example(_dot_)net>
Subject: Is dinner ready?
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:
<20030712040037(_dot_)46341(_dot_)5F8J(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com>
Corrected Text
--------------
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=brisbane; d=example.com;
c=simple/simple; q=dns/txt; i=joe(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com;
h=Received : From : To : Subject : Date : Message-ID;
bh=2jUSOH9NhtVGCQWNr9BrIAPreKQjO6Sn7XIkfJVOzv8=;
b=AuUoFEfDxTDkHlLXSZEpZj79LICEps6eda7W3deTVFOk4yAUoqOB
4nujc7YopdG5dWLSdNg6xNAZpOPr+kHxt1IrE+NahM6L/LbvaHut
KVdkLLkpVaVVQPzeRDI009SO2Il5Lu7rDNH6mZckBdrIx0orEtZV
4bmp/YzhwvcubU4=;
Received: from client1.football.example.com [192.0.2.1]
by submitserver.example.com with SUBMISSION;
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe SixPack <joe(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com>
To: Suzie Q <suzie(_at_)shopping(_dot_)example(_dot_)net>
Subject: Is dinner ready?
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:
<20030712040037(_dot_)46341(_dot_)5F8J(_at_)football(_dot_)example(_dot_)com>
Notes
-----
The "simple" header canonicalization doesn't change the header fields in any
way.
Folded header fields are missing one space of indentation (they have 5 spaces
instead of 6), which makes the verification fail. Note that the plain text
version of the RFC adds a prefix of three spaces before each line of text,
which must be ignored.
In section A.3, the indentation is changed again (5 spaces instead of 6 + the
"b=" tag has 2 additional spaces of indentation).
Test cases:
- opendkim:
https://github.com/cyrusimap/opendkim/blob/ab2934e131cbe670b49f11db9daf8cd1223e3839/libopendkim/tests/t-testdata.h#L74
- go-dkim: https://github.com/emersion/go-dkim/blob/master/verify_test.go#L9
Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
--------------------------------------
RFC6376 (draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis-15)
--------------------------------------
Title : DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures
Publication Date : September 2011
Author(s) : D. Crocker, Ed., T. Hansen, Ed., M. Kucherawy, Ed.
Category : DRAFT STANDARD
Source : Domain Keys Identified Mail
Area : Security
Stream : IETF
Verifying Party : IESG
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html