[ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful

Jim Fenton fenton at cisco.com
Tue Mar 21 12:17:18 PST 2006


Just in the interest of accuracy...

Barry Leiba wrote:
> Third, as was pointed out, a sender could hash a large body once and
> send it multiple times, possibly saving a lot of time/effort.

This doesn't depend on the new hashing proposal.  A signer could do this
under the current proposal.

-Jim


More information about the ietf-dkim mailing list