Re: [Ietf-dkim] Remove the signature! (was: Re: DKIM reply mitigations: re-opening the DKIM working group)

2022-11-28 Thread Evan Burke
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 9:16 AM Dave Crocker wrote: > I thought spammers varied in skills and dedication and that simple > mechanisms that blocked lazy spammers was generally viewed as being > useful. Apparently that has changed, and now all spammers are highly > skilled, dedicated and

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-11-28 Thread Laura Atkins
I support this. If the consensus is “that specific parts of the message have not been altered” should be added I’d support that, too. laura > On 28 Nov 2022, at 02:30, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Area Director hat on here: > > The discussion Barry kicked off has been

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Remove the signature! (was: Re: DKIM reply mitigations: re-opening the DKIM working group)

2022-11-28 Thread Dave Crocker
On 11/28/2022 2:40 AM, Laura Atkins wrote: On 27 Nov 2022, at 18:48, Dave Crocker wrote: On 11/26/2022 5:38 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: Not Safe: It’s not safe because it breaks Barry’s use case above, and others have pointed out MUA usage of the signature. DKIM signature survival after delivery

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-11-28 Thread Dave Crocker
On 11/28/2022 12:14 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 6:50 PM Dave Crocker wrote: This does not provide any real understanding of how replay is accomplished.  And since it's easy to explain and doesn't take much text, I'll again encourage including that in the

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Remove the signature! (was: Re: DKIM reply mitigations: re-opening the DKIM working group)

2022-11-28 Thread Laura Atkins
> On 27 Nov 2022, at 18:48, Dave Crocker wrote: > > On 11/26/2022 5:38 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: >> Not Safe: It’s not safe because it breaks Barry’s use case above, and others >> have pointed out MUA usage of the signature. > > DKIM signature survival after delivery is not a goal for DKIM. If

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-11-28 Thread Scott Kitterman
On November 28, 2022 8:17:21 AM UTC, "Murray S. Kucherawy" wrote: >On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 9:34 PM Scott Kitterman >wrote: > >> I would add mention of the problem statement draft. I think it may turn >> out >> to be the most important of the ones we have now. >> > >Do you mean: Mention it

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-11-28 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 9:34 PM Scott Kitterman wrote: > I would add mention of the problem statement draft. I think it may turn > out > to be the most important of the ones we have now. > Do you mean: Mention it as a mandatory deliverable? Should we still produce that document even if we

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-11-28 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 6:50 PM Dave Crocker wrote: > On 11/27/2022 6:30 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM, RFC 6376) defines a mechanism for > > using a digital signature to associate a domain identity with an email > > message in a secure way, and to assure