[ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes

[Murray S. Kucherawy]

On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, Hector Santos wrote:
> Attackers will be able to create a FAILED fascimile of a primary domain 
> DKIM complete message and as long as the primary has a t=y policy, the 
> attackers need not worry about HASH PERFECTION - it just randomly 
> creates a signature with a junk hash because the t=y will promote a 
> IGNORE FAILURE concept.

OK so in fact the complaint is "t=y is dangerous", not "a hacker could 
insert t=y into someone's policy" (which is what you originally said). 
There are other people here who can debate that as well as or better than 
I so I'll yield.

In sticking to the Subject: of this thread, no, this was not discussed at 
the Interop event.  SSP was determined early on to be out-of-scope for our 
tests.  We were focusing only on RFC4871 itself.

It was felt, though, that SSP might be the subject of a future Interop 
event once the draft has become an RFC (or, perhaps, multiple proposals 
are available).