Chris Haynes wrote:
I'm sure you know all this.
Not the quote of the author, thanks. The article is somewhat
beside the point, of course there are always collisions for
all hash functions, that's a part of the definition... ;-)
Almost constant per bit.
I'm curious as to the impact of schemes like DK & SES
which sometimes form / check digests of almost everything.
Maybe off-list responses would be fair to SPF.
So far I'm not sure why a receiver might really *_want_*
to support DKIM if he could get similar effects cheaper.
Comparing the costs of SPF vs. DKIM checks for receivers
would be interesting, assuming that the real benefit is to
catch FAIL results. It would be also on topic... ;-) Bye