On 06/08/2012 08:10 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> (dropping opendkim-users)
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, Ken Murchison wrote:
>> 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)?
>
> It does.
OK. Great.
>> 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.
>
> What code are you reading? The order reversal occurs in
> dkim_canon_selecthdrs() in libopendkim/dkim-canon.c.
Apparently the wrong code. I thought I looked earlier at that code and
didn't see the reversal. I'm looking again and still not seeing it.
I'm sure its because I'm either drinking too much, or not enough.
--
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University
Received on Sat Jun 09 2012 - 15:36:46 PST