Re: [Ietf-dkim] Testing a DKIM implementation

Steffen Nurpmeso <steffen@sdaoden.eu> Fri, 22 March 2024 23:31 UTC

Return-Path: <steffen@sdaoden.eu>
X-Original-To: ietf-dkim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-dkim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF63DC151083 for <ietf-dkim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 16:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sdaoden.eu header.b="OWYbacKj"; dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=sdaoden.eu header.b="BKUWIRRU"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MGYBlit1STVl for <ietf-dkim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 16:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sdaoden.eu (sdaoden.eu [217.144.132.164]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F02BC14F6EA for <ietf-dkim@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 16:31:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sdaoden.eu; s=citron; t=1711150278; x=1711816944; h=date:author:from:to:cc:subject: message-id:in-reply-to:references:mail-followup-to:openpgp:blahblahblah: author:from:subject:date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to: resent-cc:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:mail-followup-to:openpgp: blahblahblah; bh=Qppfqr++vVD5T2dzms9kU4GlwGwYb95hrUTPUnMaeYQ=; b=OWYbacKjH+05yVmWT8eAnoY34LxIZbrpW+AdOlKHEUNp+uOjDnXu+ClU9DDw028v0J/SR0AT DSqHhst2lAdKFblHTh4iVcsPzBNQ2f9IkbtF+AebmjR7zkYqvrmancprgYRitYSrxr/a3Jx4qI tfIqVYq+A/xaPkIFmOBKUlSoj+jzSZFFHus/8XY2uilQJ1eqyzH/ABu8HnXAPjBf7l7DAW0nrX 9qPZXIyaAHMZwqI/yF8sqihFK/fp8asEklSvUzclKuSHcbSqQjb/ZDrf2UpRxKDUYEwKujWkni xonXM2+U6VRdXh8/NNlM2M1dnirld5w/mBfqKUKRTTGWY3qA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sdaoden.eu; s=orange; t=1711150278; x=1711816944; h=date:author:from:to:cc:subject: message-id:in-reply-to:references:mail-followup-to:openpgp:blahblahblah: author:from:subject:date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to: resent-cc:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:mail-followup-to:openpgp: blahblahblah; bh=Qppfqr++vVD5T2dzms9kU4GlwGwYb95hrUTPUnMaeYQ=; b=BKUWIRRUh/Ge2Sb8U2slkdYdFyEReLVozOEQ/Nk18VYlfjfZ+v3dOfVAiYEenmneHmF5OCPM eA6sA2a8ulfEAw==
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 00:31:16 +0100
Author: Steffen Nurpmeso <steffen@sdaoden.eu>
From: Steffen Nurpmeso <steffen@sdaoden.eu>
To: David Harris <David.Harris@pmail.gen.nz>
Cc: ietf-dkim@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20240322233116.HltawnVh@steffen%sdaoden.eu>
In-Reply-To: <65FD789C.26406.50826198@David.Harris.pmail.gen.nz>
References: <65FD789C.26406.50826198@David.Harris.pmail.gen.nz>
Mail-Followup-To: "David Harris" <David.Harris@pmail.gen.nz>, ietf-dkim@ietf.org
User-Agent: s-nail v14.9.24-612-g7e3bfac540
OpenPGP: id=EE19E1C1F2F7054F8D3954D8308964B51883A0DD; url=https://ftp.sdaoden.eu/steffen.asc; preference=signencrypt
BlahBlahBlah: Any stupid boy can crush a beetle. But all the professors in the world can make no bugs.
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/8e3GtpjpOAh4wwCm_FVg_3GVv3g>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-dkim] Testing a DKIM implementation
X-BeenThere: ietf-dkim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DKIM List <ietf-dkim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-dkim/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-dkim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim>, <mailto:ietf-dkim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 23:31:25 -0000

David Harris wrote in
 <65FD789C.26406.50826198@David.Harris.pmail.gen.nz>:
 |My thanks to Murray S. Kucherawy, who was most helpful in answering my 
 |previous questions about specifics of RFC6376..
 |
 |I now have my implementation complete: I was wondering if there is a 
 |recommended way of testing it - for instance, a reference site that \
 |allows you 
 |to send messages and then replies with information about the correctness \
 |of 
 |your implementation, or an application that can generate signatures \
 |for data 
 |you supply, showing its work product (the various hashes and canonicalized 
 |forms) so you can compare it with your own.
 |
 |Any pointers would be appreciated.

I can quote a mail of mine from March 6th:

  I am thankful i could contact https://www.appmaildev.com/de/dkim
  for testing purposes.  (If you read this: your service is
  broken, it does not support continuation lines in DKIM
  signatures *at*all*.  But thank you!)

It also does not support Ed25519.
(Maybe they fixed it.  Apologies for when i am wrong.)

 |Thanks in advance for any assistance.
 |
 |-- David --

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)