Re: BIND 9.18.6 disables RSASHA1 at runtime?

2022-09-05 Thread Ondřej Surý
Petr, care to prepare a MR for this? After all, it's RedHat who is making us all to go through this mess. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý (He/Him) ond...@isc.org My working hours and your working hours may be different. Please do not feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours. > On 5.

Re: BIND 9.18.6 disables RSASHA1 at runtime?

2022-09-05 Thread Mark Andrews
> On 5 Sep 2022, at 18:41, Bjørn Mork wrote: > > Petr Menšík writes: > >> It is suitable for all other algorithms so I disagree that >> without algorithms 5 and 7 it is not usable at all. Majority of >> secured domains use stronger algorithms already. > > Would it be the same if it worked

Re: BIND 9.18.6 disables RSASHA1 at runtime?

2022-09-05 Thread Bjørn Mork
Mark Andrews writes: > What records in paypal.com do you or your customers actually depend upon > being signed? Paypal’s web servers depend on CAs not the DNS to provide > trust anchors. It's not their SMTP servers as paypalcorp.com is not signed. OK, let's just hope no CA runs Redhat then.

Re: BIND 9.18.6 disables RSASHA1 at runtime?

2022-09-05 Thread Petr Menšík
On 9/2/22 14:23, Bjørn Mork wrote: Mark Andrews writes: We don’t log rsamd5 is disabled now ec or ed curves when they are not supported by the crypto provider. Why should rsasha1 based algs be special? Because RSASHA1 validation still is a MUST in RFC8624? MD5 is and ED is not. I don't know

Re: BIND 9.18.6 disables RSASHA1 at runtime?

2022-09-05 Thread Bjørn Mork
Petr Menšík writes: > It is suitable for all other algorithms so I disagree that > without algorithms 5 and 7 it is not usable at all. Majority of > secured domains use stronger algorithms already. Would it be the same if it worked for a majority of TLDs? Say "nz" as an arbitrary example.

Re: Mailing list questions (DMARC, ARC, more?)

2022-09-05 Thread Alessandro Vesely
On Sun 04/Sep/2022 14:17:25 +0200 Benny Pedersen wrote: ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.pao1.isc.org;  dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=tana.it;  spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tana.it;  dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=tana.it header.i=@tana.it That stanza is faulty. The key at