[ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
arvel.hathcock at altn.com
Tue Dec 26 14:34:24 PST 2006
I agree with the below. There is already a means to determine what
header change broke the signature (assuming a signer is interested in
providing the necessary data) and assuming a verifier even cares.
Paul Hoffman wrote:
> What is being proposed above is that an additional signature be
> generated and validated for every "important" header. That is a huge
> waste of energy, and it will cause massive unnecessary resource usage,
> particularly for recipients who don't care why a signature might not
> have validated.
> If the concern is "accidental" breakage, Michael's point is exactly right:
> At 8:36 AM -0800 12/26/06, Michael Thomas wrote:
>> One can already do this by copying the relevant headers into the
>> using z=. I already do this and it works just fine for mailing lists.
> If the concern is "purposeful" breakage, encouraging signers to sign
> messages covering only the From header and none of the body is
> incredibly bad. Wayne is exactly right:
More information about the ietf-dkim