On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Franck Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> ------------------------------ > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Franck Martin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ------------------------------ >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Franck Martin <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> This is interesting, however it seems to me that DMARC should be more >>> aware of it if used. >>> >> >> Why? This is a way of satisfying the alignment requirement on the DKIM >> side. DMARC doesn't need to know it's there. The same is true of ATPS, >> for example. >> >> Sure but you have a strong DKIM signature and a weak DKIM signature, >> using about the same domain, it is like the strong DKIM signature did not >> exist... >> > > Assuming by "strong DKIM signature" you mean the originator signature that > covers the whole message, then given the MLM is going to invalidate it, it > basically doesn't exist. > > Yes but are you assuming you only put the weak DKIM signature, when you > specifically know you are emailing a mailing list? > > Or what about a receiver which is not a mailing list? You are just > allowing better replay of the message, if you put any weak DKIM signature > in the message... Unless the weak DKIM signature is constrained to a > specific usage. > You're constraining it to use by a specific, very small set of domains, and only for a limited time. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
