[ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error

[Damon]

> > A mailing-list not breaking signatures is a scary idea.  This would
> > open the door for all sorts of abuse.
>
> Yesterday, of the 32082 messages that Cisco sent through mailing lists,
> 99.6% of them passed verification. Keep your grubby mitts off of the
> supposedly broken signatures like RFC4871 says.
>
>       Mike

Exactly,

 So why again are we demoting broken signatures to No Signature? This
promotes ALL to STRICT.

Regards,
Damon Sauer