Hi Barry, I do not see any problems. Mail transfer and transport are both running at Layer four of the TCP model.
Whether you name the infrastructure "mail transfer" or "transport", the architectural reality remains identical: Introducing nested serialization complexity at the trust boundaries between MTAs and Milters invites parsing differentials. Semantic ambiguities regarding object-key ordering shatter cryptographic canonicalization, which is the core definition of OWASP Top 10: Insecure Design. Regards, Timo It looks like Barry Leiba aimed to say: >> Standard JSON specifications lack strict object-key ordering and >> duplicate key handling. Introducing nested object complexity into >> the transport layer creates serialization risks that flat, native >> tag-value structures inherently avoid > > You've referred to the "transport layer" multiple times, and that > puzzles me, as there's nothing here that involves the transport layer. > What do you think it is that does? > > Or are you perhaps confusing "mail TRANSFER" with "transport". TCP is > the transport layer for SMTP, and SMTP is solidly in the application > layer. > > Barry > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Timo Gerke Hamburg, Germany "If you think technology can solve your security problems then you don't understand the problems and you don't understand the technology." -- Bruce Schneier
OpenPGP_0x9F03DF9F597BF31E.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
