On Apr 27, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeff Macdonald [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 10:05 AM
>> To: McDowell, Brett
>> Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Wrong Discussion - was Why mailing lists
>> should strip DKIM signatures
>> 
>>> That's interesting.  Let's make this concrete... I'll use myself as
>> an example.
>>> 
>>> X = me/PayPal.com
>>> Y = this list/[email protected]
>>> Z = Google's Gmail service [1]
>>> 
>>> It is my assumption that someone subscribed to this list has a
>> gmail.com account (or a Yahoo.com account [2]).  Therefore, my use case
>> is simple.  I would hope that those of you reading this from your Gmail
>> or Yahoo! accounts actually receive this message.  If Z breaks the
>> signature, you won't see this.
>> 
>> how about Y breaking the signature? I see your message only because I
>> told gmail's filtering system to not put messages into the spam folder
>> for this list. Otherwise it would of gone into the spam folder.
>> Looking at the source of the message, I only see the list's DKIM
>> signature.
> 
> Y breaking the signature isn't relevant (in this hypothesis).  Y also says 
> when it got the message from X, X's signature was intact.  That Y messed up 
> the signature, making Z unable to verify it directly, is not important; Z 
> trusts Y, so Z trusts Y's Authentication-Results: that says X's signature was 
> fine when it got to Y.
> 
>> Should the policy statements be ignored at that point?
> 
> In this hypothesis, they could be.  Or, they could be applied.  If X's ADSP 
> says "all" or "discardable", and Z trusts Y, and Y claims X's message had a 
> valid signature, ADSP is satisfied.
> 

That's how I see it.  The key is that Y *validates* the DKIM signature and 
processes the sender's ADSP when it receives the message before taking it's 
next action.  If Y didn't actually validate with comparable rigor as Z, then Z 
would have no basis to trust mail from Y.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to