Folks,

In:

   <http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2009q2/011959.html>

Steve Atkins posted a list of suggested DKIM features to drop.

This note is intended to anchor a discussion thread for discusses one of those
features, namely:


>     Drop support for SHA1 entirely. It's beginning to look  
> cryptographically very dubious, and is being dropped by pretty much  
> everyone else. Even if the attacks against it don't affect the way  
> it's used in DKIM it seems unwise to suggest it be used at all. At the  
> very least it seems a poor "marketing" move to include an algorithm  
> that's been dropped by most everyone else as insecure before this spec  
> is finalized.
> 
>     "Verifiers MUST support rsa-sha256 and MAY support rsa-sha1.  
> Signers SHOULD sign using rsa-sha256 and SHOULD NOT sign using rsa- 
> sha1." might provide enough wiggle room to allow existing code time to  
> migrate away from SHA1.


Please discuss arguments for and against dropping this.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net





_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to