IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 06 February 2017 02:33 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 D9C061294AD for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:33:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, 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=fEVYZhUS; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=z31bjisP; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=IMq3UqP7; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=llHbQ92a
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 zsZXlceG1Iql for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:33:39 -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 7064D129459 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:33:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 49357 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2017 02:33:38 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-message-id:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=c0cb.5897e082.k1702; bh=KBVbajzxzYIwbyZFkn/DBSi7iNVstJQswtixUPiqmJc=; b=fEVYZhUS/l55NpRaesr6ISqwHqHbVP+J3EEmExeqgJGptKu6QZhEx5njf32Mn7GdYFK3eJlEIZiDoXZ6yJdJ1lzjlKYUCFpDLf/muoFKBv9h3j6RRye0OEa9gK9hLT+bsZfYnxuvBntdNBxPGwfFVNXr3nGVQLRhGxH8MEoYQs4py9LMlVzCcl49kthuL5uaY3qtO8GJ2UTsL4270LY0Kjvew0HY6goSnL/RyRzQMt6Wm9/gVe7bH0P0GE5o+KLw
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-message-id:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=c0cb.5897e082.k1702; bh=KBVbajzxzYIwbyZFkn/DBSi7iNVstJQswtixUPiqmJc=; b=z31bjisPlQPIYs5KzRen7ptubDLLQtBI8oBmuJdrJ7rWmFfpTmrzoC06KkrUvwxq2Z168j9ioyDU24FizZF6AtMx9w8079gHiQY+mpSF0C7r9v8q0DP45azUrnJmvmFvv7ijuqd+fBxloXIaMxIvIS54OCu/FbCZ683IOHlWVvKnY+uJvEj32PIpFKYd2FsZE505sZkhvZAT8KSpCQeM24jsQIRD9zwQWZ6lFBBnC8tvYcmzHV+jKBQVpVVGyh7m
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; 06 Feb 2017 02:33:38 -0000
ReSent-Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 21:33:32 -0500
ReSent-From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
ReSent-To: Dispatch WG <dispatch@ietf.org>
ReSent-Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702052133320.1175@ary.qy>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 21:33:17 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702052130050.1175@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Delivered-To: johnl@iecc.com
X-Received: (qmail 49286 invoked by uid 1014); 6 Feb 2017 02:33:17 -0000
X-Delivered-To: virtual-taugh-johnl@taugh.com
X-Received: (qmail 49283 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2017 02:33:17 -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=c081.5897e06d.k1702; bh=KBVbajzxzYIwbyZFkn/DBSi7iNVstJQswtixUPiqmJc=; b=IMq3UqP7pXAwYDkWJXmvRZNtOHM4r0PGbX/lnE9SSeeystNyO2syECFz9AxSfc0Jj+EEYx06qmOT4Rq+0PJZWQprvEDYpRoxwqGgdh/EEEDYgFyOBMyiF8tqyr52yrnqtQAceWOEsqE2Sj6wmZDvh92KBWapqOwx9ddgOzqc2wvp2s3Qir0L+TaPSh1m0nr66ajjRMwfHPKG8smaqn5atuKseGg7xX7MhVnvGCHlY28TgIqvK7W2rM6ZJ9DVuVAq
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=c081.5897e06d.k1702; bh=KBVbajzxzYIwbyZFkn/DBSi7iNVstJQswtixUPiqmJc=; b=llHbQ92aXqcXAsjTGURi3c8TEx0z3v5OlzbHjC+mTGyqJWMK5rue+IAOLYYVoRvcTaT2dIeh8ZHMaV1+J4KnIW+/STnDHik6gpvM2b7aOdDn3SluUISmPEF1wrwQ2prUOxg8f1/rkmRlzKqULI0LwnP9E9SwLqaYfNJPl11FQ3hHEQGeas59sea0ADYn/QBApDNeH3h8cFsCThfJcQbbwT0ynVwnvL21yDInMQ04wg8EjboTgDdMw4Ost789tsSd
X-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; 06 Feb 2017 02:33:17 -0000
In-Reply-To: <ffac8e7c-6930-acf3-9415-a6a6a53d2cc2@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <20170206020826.1108.qmail@ary.lan> <ffac8e7c-6930-acf3-9415-a6a6a53d2cc2@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-DCC-iecc-Metrics: miucha.iecc.com 1107; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
ReSent-Subject: Re: [dispatch] Updating DKIM for stronger crypto
ReSent-User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/Yad-H2YTE-H5yYKL_4ejgJ7F5To>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
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: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 02:33:44 -0000

> On 06/02/17 02:08, John Levine wrote:
>> Does this seem reasonable?
>
> Eminently, assuming implementers want ed25519 and those deploying will 
> adopt it. There are, IMO, good reasons for both to also like that idea, 
> but whether or not they realise that is to be seen I guess.

It is my impression that the majority of DKIM signing and verifying is 
done using a small number of libraries.  If we can get the big gorillas on 
board, and arrange to upgrade the C opendkim, perl Mail::DKIM, and python 
pydkim, routine upgrades will do most of the rest.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email