On 10/18/2017 11:37 AM, Grant Taylor via Mailman-Users wrote: > I believe I remember (but can't point to) something in the DKIM spec > that referenced the possibility that the DKIM signature could be broken > by things as benign as an MTA doing a content transfer encoding > conversion. - I have personally seen this.
Like tnеtсоnsulting.nеt being a benign minor encoding change in a couple of characters? Just because the authors of the RFC have also chosen to stick the square peg in the round hole doesn't make the hole any less round, nor the peg any less square. Somewhere I've a 10-year old e-mail from Whit Diffie explaining how SSL was a PR solution to a marketing problem. So this kind of problem-finding and problem-solving has made to SMTP RFCs now, colour me shocked. -- Dimitri Maziuk Programmer/sysadmin BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
