On 27/Apr/10 18:34, John R. Levine wrote: > It just doesn't seem realistic to expect to be able to use contributors' > signatures for list mail for a variety of reasons. > > Most lists will break signatures, for a variety of reasons that aren't > going to change, starting with subject line tags.
Couldn't that be standardized, or taken into account using the List-* headers? > If the signature is > broken, you need something else so the list can assert that a message was > signed when it arrived. But such assertions are only credible if the list > itself is trustworthy. You mean DKIM-enabled? > If you already know you trust the list, how much practical benefit is there > to the assertion? None. But lists who don't require DKIM to accept posts may happen to publish occasional forgeries. BTW, are there lists that require DKIM "pass" to accept posts? _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
