Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #42 - Expand DMARC reporting URI functionality

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On Thu 03/Dec/2020 18:08:50 +0100 John R Levine wrote:
>>> When this came up before someone said that reports can be extremely
>>> large, many megabytes.  An HTTP POST or PUT is a much better way to send that.
>>
>> However faster, an https PUT/POST at midnight arrives later than a mailto at 
>> midday.
> 
> I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all.

I said so because you said https is faster.  The spec is unclear about intervals, but this is matter for another ticket.


> Why do you believe that people would not send reports by mail and by https
> at the same time?

Oh my.  Hadn't thought about that.  It will certainly cause duplicates.


>> Yes, PUT is better than POST.
>>
>> How about pgp-signing the file with the dkim key?
> 
> Sorry, that doesn't make any sense either.  DKIM keys and PGP keys are 
> different.

Hm... let me try and sign this message.

$ cat delta.private | PEM2OPENPGP_USAGE_FLAGS=sign pem2openpgp "Delta selector <[e-mail]>" | gpg --import

Now I have:
sec   rsa1148 2020-12-03 [SC]
      500982D49712C507C236B2D6B8ABBBF9A091CC0D
uid           [ unknown] Delta selector <[e-mail]>

$ gpg -u 500982D49712C507C236B2D6B8ABBBF9A091CC0D --clearsign < this text


Can you verify it?  I cannot find how to transform the delta selector public key into a pgp public key block.

That is to transform this:

$ eval $(digs delta._domainkey.tana.it txt |sed -rn -e 's/^"//' -e 's/" *"//g' -e 's/"$//p') && printf -- '-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\n%s\n-----END PUBLIC KEY-----\n' "$(echo $p |base64 -d |base64)"
- -----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MIGuMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GcADCBmAKBkA5YMrfcQD3kzCQJFRXLatbXbl6h07EE1TrJOVp9
4EeBV50QFuBIk0igZgPTA39O77mUyNii81hD4q2g9/Hoj9asqQHTTKjqk+gwZWC+X46K5BYSRPTC
C9sidg20Laubyn0ATGaz+OyIl4JcE2rsEXwXLJ98OFEaa3gWyUVO9+lNwebs932bOtHbM2YpzJzE
PQIDAQAB
- -----END PUBLIC KEY-----

To this:

$ gpg  --export --armor 500982D49712C507C236B2D6B8ABBBF9A091CC0D\!
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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=KJkG
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

> It is hypothetically possible to sign an http transaction with DKIM

Any example?

 
> but that would be a giant distraction from what we're doing here.

Should be optional, like DKIM-signing aggregate reports sent by mailto.


Best
Ale
- -- 


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iMMEAQEKAB0WIQRQCYLUlxLFB8I2sta4q7v5oJHMDQUCX8k7GgAKCRC4q7v5oJHM
DbyaBHwJ7JddtR6f9mAEF22QdZVX01ZQZagggwaqvHfXPWlD+wPafGH7Hi4dm4B+
Bh1BO/mevC5l0wYdLg5X2mTPhqNMzU+aCWz2MwdYK1iU2JQ6/KQOXpGZuhf597N0
BmRMpe56UDWt06wsE8cNUKmNiaVlJ6yaHXHSV5tUmcqXpXtGaqheAYxyY1BXepd5
KmcpmQg=
=+5y4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----