In your letter dated Tue, 02 May 2017 15:03:15 -0400 you wrote:
>I agree that people reject mail if there=B9s no PTR; I think this is used in
>fighting spam, based on an inference that if there=B9s no PTR, you=B9re a s=
>pam
>bot rather than a legitimate mail server.
>The first case listed in 4. C
On Fri, 5 May 2017, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote:
I strongly advocate against the adoption of this document in current from.
It violates basic interoperability guidelines by defining way to many
algorithms with no justification why any of them are better or worse than
others.
There is no useful
Hi Paul
On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:46:21PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> Not only that, but the reason specified is to bump RSA from
> RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 to RSASSA-PSS. As far as I know, the security
> issues of RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 are that when using it to _encrypt_
> bogus data, it can be used as an
