First quarter 2006 Archives by author

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...

Starting: Sun Jan 1 14:59:03 PDT 2006
Ending: Fri Mar 31 15:34:38 PDT 2006
Messages: 1351

• [ietf-dkim] Measurement Results on Deployment Ratio of Domain Authentications   Kazu Yamamoto ( 山本和彦 )
• [ietf-dkim] OT o=. (was: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item:Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks)   Jim Fenton (fenton)
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Ólafur Guðmundsson
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 submitted   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] (-base document) clarifications on use of l= tag   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] Slides for -base discussion this afternoon   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] -base status slides (updated)   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Introduction lacks the introduction of SSP   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practicalsolution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailing lists   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] OT: DK credits   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Jon Callas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65   DKIM Chair
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   DKIM Chair
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   DKIM Chair
• [ietf-dkim] Issues summary from IETF65 meeting   DKIM Chair
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   DKIM Chair
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   DKIM Chair
• The Value of Reputation (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: Domain Keys Identified Mail (dkim))   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] dkim web page updated   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] some more comments on the threats draft   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Terminology   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document is complete   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document is complete   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document is complete   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Support and Deployment lists for organizations   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document iscomplete   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Support and Deployment lists for organizations   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] now up on roundup tracker   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] touting the DKIM Supporters list   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] dkim web page update   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New DKIM FAQ   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Please resend: any mail send to me after 8am Monday.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM agenda for Dallas.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] issues disposition   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Auth-Results open discussion forum   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Auth-Results open discussion forum   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Clarify delegation to 3rd parties   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] If not "retailer", then...?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM-related events on dkim.org home page   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] hearing both sides of the conversation   Dave Crocker
• [Fwd: EKR - Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)]   Dave Crocker
• [Fwd: EKR2 - Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)]   Dave Crocker
• [Fwd: EKR-3- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)]   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Posting rights restricted to registered email address   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Posting rights restricted to registered email address   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Dave Crocker
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Dave Crocker
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION: draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Mark Delany
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] RFC 4387 on Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Operational Protocols: Certificate Store Access via HTTP (fwd)   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 submitted   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Mark Delany
• No new PKIs! (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?)   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc   Mark Delany
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Mark Delany
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Mark Delany
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Daniel Dreymann
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Daniel Dreymann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Terminology (was: Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP))   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Terminology   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: one more comment I forgot...   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] open-ended threats (was: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt])   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Terminology   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] WEAK (was: DKIM and mailing lists)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: WEAK   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Misstatement of the DKIM mechanism   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: How mailing lists mutate messages   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] SSP accelerators (was: How mailing lists mutate messages)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] terminology (was: DKIM and mailing lists)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary, SSP again   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Misleading figure in 1.1 (was: Attempted summary, SSP again)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary, SSP again   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary, SSP again   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] OT o=. (was: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: the Internet is inherently insecure   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: now up on roundup tracker   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Measurement Results on Deployment Ratio of Domain Authentications   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: fyi- current open issues   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x= (was: testing Message Corpus & question for base spec)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: (-base document) clarifications on use of l= tag   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] OT: DK credits   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] OT: DK credits   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: issue with DKIM simple header algorithm and milter-based implementations   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: issue with DKIM simple header algorithm and milter-based implementations   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: authentification-results draft?   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: signature h= and z= tags   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concentrate on the threats doc   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] #1170 (was: WG last call on threats draft)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Misleading figure in 1.1   Frank Ellermann
• The Value of Arguing About Reputation (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation)   J.D. Falk
• the Internet is inherently insecure (Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks)   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] authentification-results draft?   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   J.D. Falk
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Stephen Farrell
• Staying on-topic (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation)   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Staying on-topic   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] some more comments on the threats draft   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: some more comments on the threats draft   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Stephen Farrell
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Stephen Farrell
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Stephen Farrell
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Stephen Farrell
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Handling issues on WG documents   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Introduction lacks the introduction of SSP   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Introduction lacks the introduction of SSP   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Misstatement of the DKIM mechanism   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Limited information in a critical section   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Misstatement of the DKIM mechanism   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Limited information in a critical section   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 DKIM can be effective within the Originator's AdmD   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document is complete   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document is complete   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document iscomplete   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Measurement Results on Deployment Ratio of Domain Authentications   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Supporting alternate algorithms   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Quite a lot of DKIM at Dallas IETF   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Quite a lot of DKIM at Dallas IETF   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM agenda for Dallas.   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM agenda for Dallas.   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Stephen Farrell
• No new PKIs! (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?)   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-01.txt   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] issues disposition   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] WG last call on threats draft   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Differences between threat-00 and threat-01   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Draft agenda for Dallas...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issues: bunch of nits for base   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: some process-problematic references in base   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: base editorial   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Clarify delegation to 3rd parties   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Issues status   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Updated agenda ...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: optional exponent needed or not?   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] jabber interims...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] WG last call on threats draft   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] resolving 1193   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Terminology   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Terminology   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: some more comments on the threats draft   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-threat-02 3.2. Use of Specific Identities   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Jim Fenton
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00.txt]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 DKIM can be effective within the Originator's AdmD   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Rating of the Attacks and Detection   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Misleading figure in 1.1   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Proposed addition to dkim-threats about hash collisions   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Jim Fenton
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Jim Fenton
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Jim Fenton
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Jim Fenton
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Ned Freed
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document iscomplete   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] RFC 4387 on Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Operational Protocols: Certificate Store Access via HTTP (fwd)   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] RFC 4387 on Internet X.509 Public Key InfrastructureOperational Protocols: Certificate Store Access via HTTP (fwd)   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] OT: DK credits   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXTrecord   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXTrecord   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targetsfor spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Amplification attack solution.   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Sha/1-256   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] Compromize?   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXT record   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] issue with DKIM simple header algorithm and milter-based implementations   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] authentification-results draft?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] authentification-results draft?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] authentification-results draft?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] some issues with draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Authentication-Results discussion   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Tony Hansen
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Tony Hansen
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] canonicalization   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Quite a lot of DKIM at Dallas IETF   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXT record   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] another try at my question on options in TXT records   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM agenda for Dallas.   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-01.txt   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Now supporting rsa-sha256   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Proposed addition to dkim-threats about hash collisions   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Going to a single hash algorithm   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Using v= in -base-01 and forwards   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] International Conference on Network Security 2006   Robert Holliday
• [ietf-dkim] Network Security 2006   Robert Holliday
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Earl Hood
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Earl Hood
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Earl Hood
• [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: Domain Keys Identified Mail (dkim)   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] The IESG Approved Creation of the DKIM WG Today   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Russ Housley
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-01.txt   Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Let's get back to chartering/threats (was Re: SSP; Is it safe and fair?)   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Auth-Results open discussion forum   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Peter Koch
• [ietf-dkim] Now supporting rsa-sha256   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal   Murray S. Kucherawy
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John L
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John L
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION: draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Eliot Lear
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] now up on roundup tracker   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] fyi- current open issues   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] fyi- current open issues   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: extensions to the RR   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Open Issues at this time   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION: draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION: draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   John Levine
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Quite a lot of DKIM at Dallas IETF   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalization   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   John R Levine
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Jeff Macdonald
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Markley, Mike
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Markley, Mike
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Markley, Mike
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Graham Murray
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Graham Murray
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Graham Murray
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Andrew Newton
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Andrew Newton
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Andrew Newton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Andrew Newton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Nick Nicholas
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Nick Nicholas
• The Value of Reputation (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: Domain Keys Identified Mail (dkim))   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Douglas Otis
• Staying on-topic (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP; Is it safe and fair?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Fenton-DKIM-Threat-02 3.1. Use of Arbitrary Identities (and SSP)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] dkim-threat-02 3.2. Use of Specific Identities   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION: draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] open-ended threats (was: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt])   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-threat-02 3.2. Use of Specific Identities   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] WEAK (was: DKIM and mailing lists)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Message Replay Abuse and Acceptance of a Signature   Douglas Otis
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Douglas Otis
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Douglas Otis
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Douglas Otis
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Misstatement of the DKIM mechanism   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Limited information in a critical section   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Misstatement of the DKIM mechanism   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Limited information in a critical section   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Limited information in a critical section   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practicalsolution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Overlooking a practical solution while also recommending a highly unfair solution   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 DKIM can be effective within the Originator's AdmD   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 DKIM can be effective within the Originator's AdmD   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: Threat-00 Eavesdropping may permit man-in-the-middle as well.   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-threats-00 Unreasonable estimate of impact from a highly probable exploit   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Expectations for the threat draft   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Support and Deployment lists for organizations   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] fyi- current open issues   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x= (was: testing Message Corpus& question for base spec)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXT record   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXTrecord   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXT record   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXTrecord   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• No new PKIs! (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?)   Douglas Otis
• No new PKIs! (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Differences between threat-00 and threat-01   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Signer referenced DNS vector   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Alternative to SSP   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   Douglas Otis
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Douglas Otis
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Draft Side Channel Language   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Draft Side Channel Language   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Eric Rescorla
• [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 submitted   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   SM
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   SM
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   SM
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   SM
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] WEAK (was: DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Introduction lacks the introduction of SSP   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Introduction lacks the introduction of SSP   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Rating of the Attacks and Detection   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] How mailing lists mutate messages   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Rating of the Attacks and Detection   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document iscomplete   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] When will we know the Threat Analysis document iscomplete   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs newAttack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x= (was: testing Message Corpus& question for base spec)   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x= (was: testing Message Corpus& question for base spec)   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 - 3.4.6 Example (Canonicalization)   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Threat-00 Limiting the scope of trust   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Handling Invalid Signatures   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Suggested alternate algorithm specification language, for now   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] signature h= and z= tags   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should r= be localpart only?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] signature h= and z= tags   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Hector Santos
• Fw: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful - Correction   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM TCO   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Hector Santos
• 1193 Proposal Benefits: [Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Hector Santos
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hector Santos
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hector Santos
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Hector Santos
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Alan Thew
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Alan Thew
• [ietf-dkim] one more comment I forgot...   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Attempted summary, SSP again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] canonicalization   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: InconsistentSignature vs Policy Attacks   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Can vendor's really say they have DKIM support yet?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] testing Message Corpus & question for base spec   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New issue: base-00 3.5 x=   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Base: Upgrade indication and protection against downgrade attacks   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] small question in draft-ietf-dkim-base-00.txt on TXT record   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: TLD key publication and signing   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] issue with DKIM simple header algorithm and milter-based implementations   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] authentification-results draft?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: issue with DKIM simple header algorithm and milter-based implementations   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Supporting alternate algorithms   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Aumont - Comite Reseaux des Universites
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists   Wietse Venema
• Attempted summary (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and mailing lists)   Wietse Venema
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Wietse Venema
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   Wietse Venema
• [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2   Wietse Venema
• [ietf-dkim] Re: The Value of Reputation   Mike Wolf
• [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values   Mike Wolf
• [ietf-dkim] Chao Feng Yang is out of the office.   Chao Feng Yang
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM and mailing lists   Miles libbey
• [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures   ned+dkim at mauve.mrochek.com
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   stephen.farrell at cs.tcd.ie
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-fenton-dkim-threats-02.txt]   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Attempted summary   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 4.2 needs new Attack Item: Inconsistent Signature vs Policy Attacks   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] RFC 4387 on Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Operational Protocols: Certificate Store Access via HTTP (fwd)   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: SSP - should we drop the cryptic o=. syntax for something a little more readable?   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] agenda item on upgrading hash algorithms?   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Threats Issue - Large DNS records make servers targets for spoofed source amplification attacks abuse   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Amplification attack solution.   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc.   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   william(at)elan.net
• [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful   william(at)elan.net
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   william(at)elan.net
• SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values]   william(at)elan.net

Last message date: Fri Mar 31 15:34:38 PDT 2006
Archived on: Fri Mar 31 15:35:33 PDT 2006

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...