On 4/21/2016 11:50 AM, John Levine wrote:
> The reason DKIM doesn't have the LURK problem is that the key issuer
> directly controls the verification key with no intermediary doing
> certification.
The text I was commenting on cited an issue with handing out "my private
key". That DKIM might
On 3/2/2016 1:35 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> LURK is an IETF mailing list that's discussing developing a
> solution to the "offload TLS without giving the CDN my private
> key" problem.
The premise seems to be that there is a single private key.
DKIM permits an arbitrary of private keys to be
___
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
