Working on a DKIM stats log analyzer, I found some facebookmail.com notification messages with two duplicate DKIM signatures.
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=facebookmail.com; s=q1-2009b; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; i...@facebookmail.com; t=1256981485; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=uFmzuYhiBd82ctm8i9mPRevatL4=; b=m4nhlG7A0JxZnEWa6DQza0oMghkv6CI+vNM41hY7tipGHfvj6EXCpXaFFGuV/xgj Zut8syylO1s4qASiqCWBaQ==; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=facebookmail.com; s=q1-2009b; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; i...@facebookmail.com; t=1256981485; h=From:Subject:Date:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=uFmzuYhiBd82ctm8i9mPRevatL4=; b=m4nhlG7A0JxZnEWa6DQza0oMghkv6CI+vNM41hY7tipGHfvj6EXCpXaFFGuV/xgj Zut8syylO1s4qASiqCWBaQ==; I don't see a difference. I'm sure this is probably minor, but with "tons" of fb notifications coming into users machines, short circuiting redundant hash verification probably has some merit. How should it be handled? Should logic be added to see if the bh= or b= base64 hash was already processed? Is this something that should be reported to Facebook? -- HLS _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html