Found 1 record.

Status: Rejected (1)

RFC 8463, "A New Cryptographic Signature Method for DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM)", September 2018

Errata ID: 7930
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Steffen Nurpmeso
Date Reported: 2024-05-09
Rejected by: Murray Kucherawy
Date Rejected: 2024-05-13

Section A.3 says:

It is about the DKIM signature, baby, it is

/gCrinpcQOoIfuHNQIbq4pgh9kyIK3AQUdt9OdqQehSwhEIug4D11BusFa3bT3FY5OsU7ZbnKELq+eXdp1Q1Dw==

(even though this pastes terribly in this HTML)

It should say:

The signature should be

QGeDV9CRdXSybek0z54GoycZ4/kl1PsNnGoOsCZ0ZOOwiGYFE8Ft0SZpy1XLW/fwlwNFC1k6VaxsnQAH8+9cAA==

Notes:

On the DKIM list i wrote

>I come here because alongside the above i had a look at RFC 8463
>again, and its example in "A.3. Signed Message".
>And if i use its "A.1. Secret Keys", and (manually) normalize the
>example message header of A.3 via "relaxed"
[.]
>and pass that through RFC 8032 code:

> privkey: b'nWGxne/9WmC6hEr0kuwsxERJxWl7MmkZcDusAxyuf2A=\n'
> pubkey : b'11qYAYKxCrfVS/7TyWQHOg7hcvPapiMlrwIaaPcHURo=\n'
> The message is:
> >>>b'from:Joe SixPack <joe@football.example.com>\r\nto:Suzie Q <suzie@shopping.example.net>\r\nsubject:Is dinner ready?\r\ndate:Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:00:37 -0700 (PDT)\r\nmessage-id:<20030712040037.46341.5F8J@football.example.com>\r\ndkim-signature:v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=football.example.com; i=@football.example.com; q=dns/txt; s=brisbane; t=1528637909; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : from : subject : date; bh=2jUSOH9NhtVGCQWNr9BrIAPreKQjO6Sn7XIkfJVOzv8=; b='<<<
>
>then i get
>
> Signature: b'QGeDV9CRdXSybek0z54GoycZ4/kl1PsNnGoOsCZ0ZOOwiGYFE8Ft0SZpy1XLW/fwlwNFC1k6VaxsnQAH8+9cAA==\n'
> Signature verifies: True
--VERIFIER NOTES--
The RFC is correct as-is. The process applied by the erratum author deviates from the algorithm used by DKIM.

Report New Errata