Re: mail signing history, was Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

[Michael Thomas <[e-mail]>]

On 11/18/20 2:44 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> Hiya,
>
> On 18/11/2020 22:41, Michael Thomas wrote:
>> It would be pretty disasterous regardless of a valid DKIM signature. 
>> Most people have no clue that email *also* prevents deniability but  
>> the damage would already be done because nobody's going believe that 
>> somebody's long cheating email romance was just elaborately spoofed. 
>> Same goes for providers if they screw up: an invalidated DKIM 
>> signature is not going to protect them from lawsuits.
>
> Maybe or maybe not. In the case of the DNC/Podesta it might
> have had utility for someone wishing to claim forgery. I
> don't really claim to know whether it'd be a useful legal
> mechanism or not, so while I do think it might, that'd need
> more checking for sure.
>
>
Meta: does anybody actually know what was scandalous about her emails?

But the recent idiocy from Rudy with Hunter's supposed email would have 
been nice to repudiate him. It didn't actually need it because the 
keystone kops were so thoroughly incompetent, but one day this sort of 
thing could come in really handy. Given that the internet is forever on 
so many other levels, publishing private keys seems too little, too late.

Mike