[ietf-dkim] yet more of the usual list nonsense, was suspicious

[Charles Lindsey]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:40:54 +0100, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> Well, if we assume that we can wave our wand and assume that there are
> DKIM signatures on usenet messages, which seems unlikely anytime soon,
> they wouldn't survive a gateway to e-mail anyway since the headers,
> although similar, are not identical.

Actually, DKIM should work quite well on Usenet if anyone wants to use it  
(quite a lot of posters routinely sign their articles with PGP, which  
makes them difficult to spoof).

And I don't see why the DKIM signature should not survive the gateway  
unless the gateway did something really stupid like removing the  
Newsgroups header (which would quite likely be signed, but is quite  
harmless if left in an email - enables people to see that it was  
originally a Usenet article). And the Gateway would be even stupider if it  
tried to alter the From, Message-Id, Date, etc which are the same in both  
media. There might be trouble if it tried to replace any Sender header  
with itself.
>
> A DKIM based filter could work at the gateway, in either direction.
> That would be a swell place to check signatures.

Indeed so.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131                       
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5