Re: [ietf-dkim] Inadvertent Spoof

2010-10-09 Thread Jeff Macdonald
Shit happens :) On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Hector Santos hsan...@isdg.net wrote: Jeff Macdonald wrote: Hence my original post with the suggested special consideration text for section 5.4 in regards to 5322.from. -- My apology to Jeff.  It was not Jeff Macdonald who wrote the text

Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing

2010-10-09 Thread Hector Santos
John R. Levine wrote: So here's a 0th cut at a list of headers where we should recommend N+1 entries in the h= rfc 5322 From Sender Reply-To (maybe not, since often smashed by mailing lists) To Cc(not Bcc even though it's 0/1) Message-ID Subject

Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing

2010-10-09 Thread John R. Levine
I don't see incentives to spoof: MIME-Version Content-Type What are the gains? This has been discussed at great length. Please consult the list archives. R's, John ___ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to

Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing

2010-10-09 Thread Hector Santos
John R. Levine wrote: I don't see incentives to spoof: MIME-Version Content-Type What are the gains? This has been discussed at great length. Please consult the list archives. Thanks - you couldn't summarize or its too hard to explain? I can search, certainly not consult. But