On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:56 AM, John R Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-kucherawy-dkim-rcpts-01 >> >> I forgot to update the title of Section 3, but other than that I think I >> captured what's been discussed. Please let me know what I've missed. >> > > How come rh= has one hash instead of several? You can put all the > addresses in the To: and Cc: headers in one header without leaking, then do > separate single hash if there are bcc's. I found Ned's comments about signing only individual recipients convincing, so that's the direction I took in this revision. It's hardly final; by all means, let's hash it out. So you want to pack all the envelope recipients into, say, a colon-separated list in "rh=", and then just confirm each envelope recipient is represented in that list? -MSK
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
