Subject: [dmarc-ietf] The "policy" value and replay attacks

From: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 15:43:47 +0200

I consistently get this from a couple of dmarc generators (126 in this
case):

      <dkim>
        <domain>tana.it</domain>
        <result>neutral</result>
        <human_result>
          signature error:
          DKIM-Signature could not parse or has bad tags/values
        </human_result>
      </dkim>

That may refer to the fact that I don't sign some critical fields,
such as the subject and content-type, or to the fact that I use l= to
allow footers.  Shouldn't that get a "policy" result, rather than
"neutral"?

I produce such fettered signing as I found DKIM-Signatures survive
better through mailing list that way.  I'll have to strengthen my DKIM
options in case of abuse, and suppose DMARC reports will make me
notice if someone manages to add a payload without breaking the sig
and then replays the message massively.  However, I'm not clear on how
exactly replay attacks would be detected.  Was that part of DMARC
requirements?

---

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 17:54:11 +0000

If not mistaken this is the DKIM result, not the the DMARC-DKIM result, there is a whole confusion which one is which if you don't read carefully the spec, sometimes I get lost myself

On May 10, 2013, at 6:43 AM, Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc