Re: possible bug in Mail::DKIM when keysize is under 1024 bits

From: Benny Pedersen <>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:42:04 +0100

Murray S. Kucherawy skrev den 2015-01-26 08:05:
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> one of the reasons i created the bug is that its desions is not to be
>> forced into opendkim, but let it be upto the domain owners to use a
>> week keysize or not, for me it make sense since perl dkim check allow
>> week keysize, i find it contraproductive to have diff rules for same
>> tests
> I disagree. Software should conform to what the standards recommend,
> but (usually) provide overrides so people can ultimately do what they
> want as long as they understand what they're doing. Put another way:
> I want to make it possible for people to shoot themselves in the foot,
> but I don't want to make it easy.

same here, its just that opendkim reject what is accepted in mail::dkim,
rfc wiese that should not be diffrent policy on that, you dont have to
agree that its domain owners onw policy not an enforced c code minimal

with opendkim 2.10 there is a warning on --bits 512, ok, but it should
still accept --bits 512 in verify

what about domain owners of old software that did not create there dkim
keys with 2.10, considered shit happends for them :(

so much policy that no one nearly cares :(

will start accepting dmarc reports ?

sure its tested working, NOT
Received on Mon Jan 26 2015 - 14:42:24 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Jan 26 2015 - 14:45:02 PST