william(at)elan.net
and (b) what are all the attack vectors and vulnerabilities
associated
with DKIM.
That would be threats to protocol itself. As far as IETF,
this is supposed to go into security considerations section
of the protocol draft (unlike threat analysis which is
supposed to be separate document or often part of the
"requirements" document - back in September/October if you remember
I said such document is going to be needed for MASS)
I think that the Security considerations section is actually going to be
a distillation of the threats document. All we need to describe in the
SC section is the residual threats that have not been adequately
controlled in the protocol. The 'threats' document discusses why certain
threats are adequately controlled.
What Russ is asking for is what I would describe as a problem statement.
What Steve Bellovin is asking for is a comprehensive security analysis
of the proposed solution. In the end we clearly have to deliver both,
but Russ's concern is the one I would expect an AD to have because it
goes to the question of what the charter should look like. Bellovin's
request is something I would expect the WG to answer.