On Mon 20/May/2024 20:10:44 +0200 John Levine wrote:
It appears that Jeremy Harris <j...@wizmail.org> said:
On 20/05/2024 09:06, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Content-Type: is a technical field
Not a term I've met before. Is there a formal definition?
As Dave said, no. There isn't even an informal definition.
Informally, I think it's quite straightforward to distinguish between technical
versus semantic fields.
And as far as "which forwarders need to change" goes -
isn't the entire point of DKIM to detect chages?
If someone changed the Content-Type header on a message I sent,
I would certainly want the signature to break.
I'd be curious to learn why. A mailing list might change it from
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
to
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
which makes the signature unrecoverable, as in the case of the message I'm
replying to. Or they may want to wrap the message into a multipart with a
footer. For consistency, they set that field to the correct value which
describes the structure of the message they distribute. Why would that change
matter when the semantic part of the message is unaltered?
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
