[ietf-dkim] Mailing lists and s/mime & dkim signatures - mua considerations
sx6un-fcsr7 at qmda.emu.st
Tue Aug 24 10:23:58 PDT 2010
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 09:45:20AM -0400, Wietse Venema allegedly wrote:
> Hector Santos:
> > IMO, it is these statements that continues to raise confusion and
> > raise the barrier of industry wide adoption that includes the general
> > population of MTA developers and operators from tiny to small to even
> > large.
> As a part-time MTA developer I am not confused. The DKIM signature
> provides a simple piece of trace information ("I handled this mail")
> that is cryptographically bound to some header and body content.
Yes. And that the obverse is possible: "I didn't handle this mail".
As Jon Callas is fond of saying, you know a protocol is a success when
it's abused in ways you never thought possible. The bi-laterals that
others have discussed are a small example of this.
Jon got it right: we don't need to know all of what is possible with
so general a component as DKIM.
My personal motivation, going back some seven years now, was about
tools for putting credibility (back) into the email system. Clearly
this is far from the only motivation across the population of DKIM
developers. Varying motives don't necessarily mean varying tools.
More information about the ietf-dkim