On 2021-12-05 21:24, John R Levine wrote:
Agreed there's risk in HTML hiding content and showing malicious
things but
that risk has existed before. An updated DKIM authenticator could
help us
understand who did those malicious updates along some forwarding path.
I'm pretty sure that changing DKIM is very out of scope for this
working group.
+1
We have a decade of experience with DKIM. If l= were useful, someone
would have figured it out by now.
is there any talks about dkim l= tag anywhere ?, can dkim verify l=
number of lines is not changed ?, will it gives special results if its
changed or not changed, does dmarc understand this tests in dkim ?
if dkim cant do this its not usefull dkim specs says it exists imho
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
