Yet another reason not to worry about this in DMARCbis.  What I suggested below 
is reasonable for today.  You are correct that it will change.  Leaving DKIM's 
issues to DKIM is the right answer.

Scott K

On October 27, 2022 2:33:01 PM UTC, "Brotman, Alex" 
<[email protected]> wrote:
>How will we handle the ever-changing definition of "weak"?
>
>--
>Alex Brotman
>Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy
>Comcast
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dmarc <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 10:27 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Weak signatures
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On October 26, 2022 11:56:31 PM UTC, Steven M Jones <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >On 10/26/22 16:45, Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
>> >>> On Oct 26, 2022, at 3:48 AM, Douglas Foster
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>> >>> Murray first raised the issue of weak signatures.
>> >>> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> Weak results need to be part of the aggregate report so that domain
>> owners understand the importance of moving from weak to strong signatures.
>> >>> ...
>> >>>
>> >>> - DAMRC Evaluation does not exit upon finding an aligned and verified 
>> >>> weak
>> signature.   Instead, the result is noted but the evaluation continues in 
>> hopes of
>> finding an aligned and verified strong signature.
>> >> Strong defined as the strength of the encryption algorithm (i.e., key 
>> >> size).
>> >
>> >
>> >And to be clear(er), any language talking about "strength" in terms of key 
>> >size
>> has to account for algorithm + key size, or you can get some incorrect 
>> treatment
>> of e.g. elliptical curve signatures.
>> 
>> If we need to define it, I'd say "weak" is anything that doesn't meet the
>> requirements of RFC 8301 (RSA key length < 1024 bits or hash is SHA-1).  Any 
>> RSA
>> SHA-256 with a large enough key or any ed25519-SHA-256 (RFC 8463) is not
>> weak.
>> 
>> No need to spend a lot of effort on this.
>> 
>> Scott K
>> 
>> Scott K
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmarc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc__;!
>> !CQl3mcHX2A!BboGMRWEwa30TsEsWdFhy6Kbbj9Mp7QiEC1KaaKRniq7TE4jzqub
>> PhnYWVDXZtfpjgArGQeryvtvMUTf_9D9DTtODa4$
>_______________________________________________
>dmarc mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to