IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dcrup] Review of draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-03

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 09 July 2017 20:51 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66DAC12FEEB for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 13:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BTF51ntiXMzi for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 13:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (www.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::4945:4343]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CCF312EC18 for <dcrup@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 13:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 46183 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2017 20:51:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 9 Jul 2017 20:51:40 -0000
Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 20:51:18 -0000
Message-ID: <20170709205118.90504.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dcrup@ietf.org
Cc: martin.thomson@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnW8nnoRGKoJQ4STAcT6CXdWFRCpz0h20hw+ksfw1x0PGg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dcrup/1AiE5hbf3QmCCaKtzmJ8hYi9tJs>
Subject: Re: [Dcrup] Review of draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-03
X-BeenThere: dcrup@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DKIM Crypto Update <dcrup.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dcrup/>
List-Post: <mailto:dcrup@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 20:51:42 -0000

In article <CABkgnnW8nnoRGKoJQ4STAcT6CXdWFRCpz0h20hw+ksfw1x0PGg@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>On PSS: I think that the idea is to retain the existing primitive with
>the fingerprint-based mode, so we should define "rsafp" as using
>PKCS#1v1.5 and accept the shortcomings of that.  I would support the
>addition of a PSS-based scheme.

Sorry, I looked at RFC 2313 and have no idea how this would apply to
DKIM other than that there seems to be a redundant message digest code
in the signature.  Starting with the existing message signing defined
in RFC 6376, can you explain what would be different?

R's,
John

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status