On 11/18/20 2:44 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hiya,
On 18/11/2020 22:41, Michael Thomas wrote:
It would be pretty disasterous regardless of a valid DKIM signature.
Most people have no clue that email *also* prevents deniability butÂ
the damage would already be done because nobody's going believe that
somebody's long cheating email romance was just elaborately spoofed.
Same goes for providers if they screw up: an invalidated DKIM
signature is not going to protect them from lawsuits.
Maybe or maybe not. In the case of the DNC/Podesta it might
have had utility for someone wishing to claim forgery. I
don't really claim to know whether it'd be a useful legal
mechanism or not, so while I do think it might, that'd need
more checking for sure.
Meta: does anybody actually know what was scandalous about her emails?
But the recent idiocy from Rudy with Hunter's supposed email would have
been nice to repudiate him. It didn't actually need it because the
keystone kops were so thoroughly incompetent, but one day this sort of
thing could come in really handy. Given that the internet is forever on
so many other levels, publishing private keys seems too little, too late.
Mike
