Design approach to MASS (was Re: [ietf-dkim] On per-user-keying)
earl at earlhood.com
Wed Aug 10 09:20:12 PDT 2005
On August 10, 2005 at 07:32, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > DKIM violates basic software design principles.
> As noted, DKIM is a protocol specification, not a software design.
Same engineering patterns apply to both.
> > For example, computing a cryptographic hash of mail message data (includin > g
> > canonicalization methods) in itself is a useful capability.
> Since DKIM has a number of parametric components, including canonicalization
> signature algorithm choices, I do not understand what additional factoring yo
> are concerned about.
Why should the generation of a message-header-based signature be
tied to a key management system? The cryptographic standards do not
do this. The method for creating digital signatures is independent
of any key management system.
RFC-1847 is good example of what I am talking about, and I
think any header-based signature effort could follow the same
> It sounds as if the main concern is about splitting things into separate
> documents, rather than changing the architecture or specification.
Splitting things up is a nicety, but not essential (as I noted in my
> Resolving the charter and producing a threat analysis are our tasks right now
A diversion, necessary diversion, but a diversion from the arguments
I am attempting to make.
More information about the ietf-dkim