IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 07 February 2017 00:38 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A58E129503 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:38:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=qsb4O2bY; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=vDolPep3
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 6x07Ecsj_Y1S for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FE691294FB for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 33420 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2017 00:38:46 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=828a.58991716.k1702; bh=U2jC1kFhzBFkK7M87PExOcgzPgMbwN/0s0NGyZUTN9U=; b=qsb4O2bYCm7av4GKk3EXh/KyBbfnf5KjNFLnUBtN37KujTZN+Pdy7Z+derYDzfnmCSNDn8gH/2zrJ3y/QaSD4kVjiirRT2BmZWU9EcUiKHkXScb0P6fNBdcJuopMQVr+B60XOExQYHqrpUOv1Hh9F4/xpsvfN5/GvyJGV1lgUyLytvTQzryqVwTJo9ulV65N8/8ixMi7oTb/Nnznhqd/bREC9swS32TV2ytO1dMTuMUROUhs0DELMCZBnZ9yi9Cs
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=828a.58991716.k1702; bh=U2jC1kFhzBFkK7M87PExOcgzPgMbwN/0s0NGyZUTN9U=; b=vDolPep3SPxDruxwKF+98c++bdbRAnw/S3szsChLQO2mTpRE4gHUK7Z8yy+CzwMdYJVFiIpSjvCLfgpQaxVXAhN9mZKHWZ0+JZS4pzRecxbFNUhkcW12f0imc1jesxygbLegLdrAwbDShKwUQzXIKhkGJjphkFOI09fNdBX+voY2pBKy8ND3Z3rSmCj1TerlXcYUKDbGAHQSZogZNoQMr68lnEZV2pF8sFs7AMCxTJ1tkiSmLH3AMgSzTCmTZoc8
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 07 Feb 2017 00:38:46 -0000
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 19:38:45 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702061938240.23435@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBOUfiiPwSOVaakTGKvFq6ZF1NLnoKoyQ0qDiB+19=OQZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20170206020826.1108.qmail@ary.lan> <CABcZeBMgPZQhvtve85L=nC9X9WxWaRYYMSm98qbV2Fgv71GjAw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702061845230.23435@ary.qy> <CABcZeBOUfiiPwSOVaakTGKvFq6ZF1NLnoKoyQ0qDiB+19=OQZQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/8w3fZ0M0svN-qovru1PeyQM7PQE>
Cc: DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:38:48 -0000

>>   I suppose that could work, but if we're going to open up the code, given
>> that elliptic signers and verifiers are showing up in crypto libraries it's
>> be a lot simpler change to DKIM.

> I don't see why this would be the case. Think of signature verification as
> a function ...

I meant a simpler change to the code.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email