Re: CBV

Mark Shewmaker wrote:

>>>>> Could the SES address contain a truncated body checksum?
>>>>
>>>> No, that makes it impossible for CBV to work.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> How can the SMTP server validate the address if it doesn't have all
>> the information it needs? If the address includes a body checksum it
>> can't be validated until after the message body is seen, and the
>> body is never transmitted during CBV.
>
> Ahh.
>
> I was suggesting that the receiving MTA validate the checksum, not the
> sending machine

In that case, such a checksum could simply be added to the headers (like any
other signing scheme); no need to cramp it into an envelope_from address.
Anything you stick in an envelope_from, like used for SES, is only to
"validate" the recipient in the SMTP dialogue. If you suck in an entire
message, to calculate a checksum over it, then this checksum should really
just be part of that same DATA (in the headers).

No?

- Mark

        System Administrator Asarian-host.org

---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx