[ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-02 review

[Alessandro Vesely]

On 02/Sep/10 20:43, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> From: Alessandro Vesely [mailto:vesely at tana.it]
>>  If this message were replayed to all mailboxes in the world, the
>>  number of complaints might be overwhelming; the more successful spam
>>  reporting, the more scaring this possibility.  And if anyone uses that
>>  for tracking domain reputation, it might drop below small integer
>>  ranges.  In such scenario, one may consider it safer to only sign mail
>>  destined to trusted recipients.
>
> Isn't reputation specifically out of scope though?

No, that's true for the /development/ of reputation systems.

> I don't see that this is an issue this WG can address, unless we want to tackle the issue of doing something DKIM-like at the connection level.

In part, the issue is being addressed in draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists 
already.  I'm questioning whether we can get away with saying that a 
MLM "is /likely/ to invalidate any or all of" a message's signatures. 
  Reputation considerations suggest that author domains may want MLMs 
to behave consistently in this respect.

Crypto stuff at connection time is a different ongoing task, which may 
be useful in countering replay attacks in general.  Joint signatures 
and From-%-rewriting are two easier and more specific techniques for 
describing how responsibility is transferred when a message transforms 
into another.  I mentioned them in this thread because I deem they are 
worth being considered, each in its niche of suitable use cases.