[ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
dhc at dcrocker.net
Mon Oct 18 06:07:15 PDT 2010
On 10/18/2010 3:31 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
> --On 15 October 2010 11:53:51 -0400 Dave CROCKER<dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>> On 10/15/2010 11:40 AM, Mark Delany wrote:
>>> Well, if you want to introduce semantic changes why not just change
>>> the meaning of h=from:to: to be semantically identical to
>> This would mean that it is /never/ ok to add a listed header field after
>> signing. Adding would /always/ break the signature.
> I assumed that the proposal applied only to headers rfc5322 says cannot be
That is a constraint that was not stated. Specifications do not allow assuming.
As offered, the modification would have the effect that I stated and /not/ the
one you state.
More information about the ietf-dkim