Re: [exim] DKIM and DomainKeys

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Rick Cooper
Date:  
To: 'Renaud Allard', 'Tom Kistner'
CC: 'Exim Users'
Subject: Re: [exim] DKIM and DomainKeys
----Original Message----
From: exim-users-bounces@??? [mailto:exim-users-bounces@exim.org] On
Behalf Of Renaud Allard Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 6:03 AM
To: Tom Kistner
Cc: Exim Users; Rick Cooper
Subject: Re: [exim] DKIM and DomainKeys

> Tom Kistner wrote:
>> Rick Cooper wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any work being done, or a patch available, to allow signing
>>> both DKIM and DomainKeys without sending a message through exim twice?
>>
>> The situation right now is a bit confusing.
>>
>> I had added concurrent Domainkeys (via libdomainkeys) and DKIM (via
>> libdkim) signing support in CVS after the 4.69 release. That code was
>> never released, but some people run a snapshot of it.
>>
>> DKIM verification support was oddly implemented, and the library I used
>> had some limitations at that time. It also brought in additional
>> build-time dependencies (lstdc++, openssl).
>>
>> So I wrote my own DKIM implementation [1] which is dependency-free and
>> portable even to non-posix platforms like Windows. Similar to how pcre
>> was handled, a copy is included in the Exim source, so Exim can have
>> DKIM support by default on its supported platforms (I didn't try them
>> all of course ...).
>>
>> The code is finished and in CVS. What is missing is the documentation. I
>> hope to finish it next week. Domainkeys support has been dropped. I
>> don't really feel like bringing it back, since I now consider it to be a
>> dead proprietary technology. If you really need to run DKIM/Domainkeys
>> concurrently with Exim, your only option is to pull a CVS snapshot by
>> date of April last year, or use the tarball I posted back then [2].
>>
>
> That said, if you want to use the same version as me to sign with both
> technologies, you can use the sources here:
> http://www.llorien.org/exim/exim-src_dk_domk.tar.gz


Thanks!

Rick



--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.