[ietf-dkim] Broken signature analysis

[Ian Eiloart]

--On 1 March 2010 22:28:04 +0800 Dave CROCKER <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

>
>
> On 2/27/2010 10:54 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>> Doesn't that conflict with the practice of removing A-Rs?
>>
>> You only need to remove A-Rs that claim to be from you.
>
>
> That's a claim worth challenging.

It's two claims, actually:

1. You need to remove A-R's that claim to be from you.
2. You don't need to remove A-R's that don't claim to be from you.

Unless the second claim is "You don't need to do anything else with A-R's 
that claim to be from you" I doubt that's the case, though.

Anyway, which claim would you challenge? Oh, maybe the claim referred to in 
the claim!

>
> d/



-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/