On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 22:52 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
[Must sign the From header.]
This has nothing to do with the originator address and everything to
do with signing the required elements of the message.
Taken to an extreme, there are reasons why any part of the message
might get
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
-Original Message-
From: Michael Thomas
Wietse Venema wrote:
Perhaps some people are confusing verification and presentation.
I really don't understand all of this hand wringing about True Verification
vs. Mutant Verification Intent on Taking Over
On Jan 10, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Perhaps some people are confusing verification and presentation.
I really don't understand all of this hand wringing about True
Verification vs. Mutant Verification Intent on Taking Over Earth.
The protocol document
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 17:01, Douglas Otis wrote:
The base draft requires the From header be signed. This header might
become modified for EAI compliance.
We've been through this before. IIRC, we included 2822-From because it's a
mandatory part of the message. If you don't sign it,
On Jan 10, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 17:01, Douglas Otis wrote:
The base draft requires the From header be signed. This header might
become modified for EAI compliance.
We've been through this before. IIRC, we included 2822-From
because it's
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 21:54, Douglas Otis wrote:
On Jan 10, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 17:01, Douglas Otis wrote:
The base draft requires the From header be signed. This header might
become modified for EAI compliance.
We've been
message validation, was Base issue:
multiplelinked signatures
Wietse Venema wrote:
John Levine:
From my perspective having a message have a valid signature with
one
implementation and having a broken signature with another is an
incompatibility. I don't think that's speculation
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Thomas
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 12:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation, was Base
issue: multiplelinked signatures
Wietse Venema wrote