[ietf-dkim] Some responsibility
Murray S. Kucherawy
msk at cloudmark.com
Mon Nov 1 10:01:04 PDT 2010
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces at mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of Graham Murray
> Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 11:51 PM
> To: ietf-dkim at mipassoc.org
> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Some responsibility
> > DKIM is no position today to provide any assurance to or for anyone to
> > be indemnified from liabilities.
> I agree that it does not provide indemnity, but it does not claim to, it
> claims to do the opposite. What it does provide is assurance of
> acceptance of liability for messages which are signed. ie if a message
> is DKIM signed, the signer cannot later claim "It was nothing to do with
> me, it must have been a forgery"
Moreover, I think we tread on dangerous ground when we make assertions in any direction that are legal rather than technical. We're about as expert in law as we are in MUAs, which is to say "not at all".
More information about the ietf-dkim