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

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Thu, 19 November 2020 20:02 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACFA63A10FD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:02:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com
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 SSQ6qO0cFQKC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:02:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D89423A1111 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:01:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5FF9768 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:01:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:01:21 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=9EEqHg5O2QK6KBAPN+x/kraDsJusqzovTxPivqyZb lU=; b=VJJYXDKrwmD4RBLn/Uloyp33ysHhWJJ2/JqoKAHHz1isKVxWuyzeiQmXJ CeH51ah4aayJ6kM/z7NcvePEGuk7jvog4H0N4wKnWPqMekjiHCJQiJnvUai/EJ1R 43IkdNswu4weM5wcpttmAtUescgxK0K778m6lXI855QxzaZd+gUMuCKdanSZKb78 bcD4dxJtXkBGjjGeh6SmAvxuzc2tzJ5ML3bq3Lbflj+42iiV0nm741C3F0x6SCXK o/3GeOif5P+ZW7mD5nju7CvnikDKqLLlpEBbxqV+hwRyRotrtcBWJPXplwWlo8x4 W5H4m2YhQ5wsVYzgZlUze0UWR2p/w==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:D8-2XylJE9MeDiAT_fcKx3ndURyHKbk2mFjBm0OkPgAbFFHQEyc_2g> <xme:D8-2X50Ys3qm1VVkpznshA4utcM43e7SrFDsZZeRxZ7TLRGMKiyPGExlNS2m5H_XE sJR_EFbOaFb-w>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudefjedgudefudcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesth ekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvght fihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephefhuedthe efgfefgffhkeehgfeugfeiudeugeejkeefleelueeiffetfeeuudeunecukfhppedutdek rddvvddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:D8-2XwrhevS8F5l8iQxFJV36bXe64nbNepR6mcipjEATyrOxtfO7bw> <xmx:D8-2X2k5nOSk2gIqsUEAGzmiIWe_mIIqS2q8lXRVOuJxwzsvB-4i4A> <xmx:D8-2Xw2MKOmfWFyvPuwF_O5A4eCPn-5DSb9KooGGyM2vD3KF6wnUJA> <xmx:EM-2X71x5t_rQnb37dEoC2K_3deN2wZOuTuE_0VuFqnvGJChQhNyMg>
Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3DE1A3064AB0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:01:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: mail signing history, was Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20201118234941.90CA7278F58D@ary.qy> <130c5f14-9121-bc45-3c95-66aae899f2f3@mtcc.com> <86a92468-183c-f921-834b-fd6ab6a0ca85@iecc.com> <ac412287-2e9f-d45f-9da5-8126b9837c8a@mtcc.com>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <769d1976-ef6b-2f7c-845e-5958106e8202@network-heretics.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:01:18 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ac412287-2e9f-d45f-9da5-8126b9837c8a@mtcc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/WFh5f1HDwVGIOdPg2u4-ZOaaULA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:02:54 -0000

On 11/19/20 1:09 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:

> He did say when somebody did dispute they actually sent a piece of 
> mail, they'd call in an "email expert" witness who would walk them 
> through why it wasn't forged. 

One of my hats.

> I have no idea if they resort to using DKIM as one of their arguments, 
> i'm guessing not because the entire idea of forgery with all of the 
> other evidence probably makes it pretty far fetched.

Absolutely I would "resort" to such, though I hope I'm never asked to 
support some irresponsible or frivolous action.   I would use every 
shred of evidence I could find.

I do understand why having a MSP provide a free non-optional 
non-repudiation service is not a great thing in general, and think that 
disclosing old private keys is probably a good way to remedy that.  
(just make sure that the repository of old private keys is very well 
advertised).

But there are lots of legitimate, responsible reasons for validating 
that some particular old message is authentic.

(To date I've never been asked to make a case for authenticity of a 
message old enough to benefit from DKIM.)

Keith