Does libopendkim properly handle multiple instances of a header field
per section 5.4.2 of RFC 6376 (where they are supposed to be hashed in
last-to-first order)?
My reading of the code leads me to believe that they are hashed in the
order that they are added with dkim_header(). If so, then the
dkim_chunk() interface is broken since it will process multiple
instances first-to-last.
Would it not make sense to have dkim_header() reverse the order of the
headers as they are added (add headers to the head of the internal
header list, rather than the tail)?
Of course, if we make this change, any existing applications that
already call dkim_header() in last-to-first order will be broken.
Thoughts?
--
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University
Received on Fri Jun 08 2012 - 16:31:07 PST