On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Dave CROCKER <[email protected]> wrote: > Jem, > > Responding with my own own views, and expressed in a longer note than one > might > wish, but a thorough review warrants a thorough response...
> On reflection, "user" is indeed a very poor choice. Client or consumer would > be > more typical distributed processing label choices. Perhaps there are other > choices? "customer" seems to fit the bill > Your view that DKIM doesn't have any input or output, other than siging and > verifying is a much deeper disconnect. I believe it represents a commonly > help > view but that that is the source of many problems in disucssing DKIM. Some > years > ago, Ned Freed highlighted the distinction quite nicely, but I can't find his > original text. If it helps clarify the situation a bit, I came across this interesting article - clarifies "identity", "authentication" and "authorization" http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc512578.aspx It's Me, and Here's My Proof: Why Identity and Authentication Must Remain Distinct By Steve Riley Senior Security Strategist Security Technology Unit Microsoft Corporation May I suggest that those 3 terms be used here, extensively? There's a clear distinction between the three, and several parallels between the security / PKI field, where identity management is a concern, to this field. srs _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
