Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #237128 > unrolled thread

MTA (DMARC)

Started byPolyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com>
First post2021-07-09 22:30 +0200
Last post2021-07-10 12:10 +0200
Articles 6 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  MTA (DMARC) Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-07-09 22:30 +0200
    Re: MTA (DMARC) "Kevin N." <kevin@notscheduled.eu> - 2021-07-09 22:50 +0200
      Re: MTA (DMARC) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-07-10 09:40 +0200
    Re: MTA (DMARC) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-10 09:50 +0200
      Re: MTA (DMARC) Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-07-10 12:00 +0200
        Re: MTA (DMARC) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-07-10 12:10 +0200

#237128 — MTA (DMARC)

FromPolyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com>
Date2021-07-09 22:30 +0200
SubjectMTA (DMARC)
Message-ID<Cz5ih-84k-3@gated-at.bofh.it>

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,
I've wrote a message regarding my MTA.

I was thinking it's corrected but...

Here what I got from the Debian mailing list server
Got some idea ?

------


This is a spf/dkim authentication-failure report for an email message
received
 from IP 82.195.75.100 on Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:12:17 +0200.

The message below did not meet the sending domain's dmarc policy.

For more information about this format please see
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6591 .


Feedback-Type: auth-failure
User-Agent: szn-mime/2.1.11
Version: 1
Original-Mail-From: bounce-debian-user=buz.hrach=seznam.cz@lists.debian.org
Original-Rcpt-To: buz.hrach@seznam.cz
Source-Ip: 82.195.75.100
Reported-Domain: lists.debian.org
Authentication-Results: email.seznam.cz 1;
	spf_align=fail;
	dkim_align=fail
Delivery-Result: delivered


Received: from bendel.debian.org (bendel.debian.org [82.195.75.100])
	by email-smtpd1.ko.seznam.cz (Seznam SMTPD 1.3.125) with ESMTP;
	Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:12:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
	id D8BBA20C7F; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-user-request@lists.debian.org  Fri Jul  9
20:12:15 2021
Old-Return-Path: <debian@polynamaude.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on bendel.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=4.0
tests=DIGITS_LETTERS,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,
	NICE_REPLY_A,PGPSIGNATURE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.2
X-Original-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
Delivered-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C8E20C6C
	for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:08
+0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.debian.org with policy bank en-ht
X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.101 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3
	tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DIGITS_LETTERS=1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
	DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
	LDO_WHITELIST=-5, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, URI_HEX=0.1]
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
	with ESMTP id 1C8FK9O9R4wF for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
	Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-policyd-weight: using cached result; rate: -4.6
Received: from cyrania.com (cyrania.com [162.213.253.79])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41BC220C07
	for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:03 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=polynamaude.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:
	Message-ID:Cc:References:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:
	Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
	Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
	List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
	bh=+sOBJuEBMYyyn07XmbyL3ZhQgjte6V2z7NjRnO47Q50=;
b=S1tAbB2sbqI2sRIMXZDfNyhV/m
	PQVXycU120Vru+cN7r+ODT2ASB8yZpuSDG4RFNTAF1uG3sl4RG8c2vBLhZs9QKIZ/1rYU6pYAcExM
	lXzfSlqCHJY/bG2e3Kc2RN04A3guikgnhbupfSip0DwK1rP7AJIy7zDAm9bJLD2f3RU8dw2z/jgbI
	2EKllS6ycufPVqVPX5I38UUVqhG2JwNzK11v3mNAdGIxYxWzVIkCNctHNmzjNFn5ijsowpFlR3i78
	I8PX50XsqVs6kaiVfI+hdNt5vO7l5BIAFeiB3aDaqaONRdzCKiuphW8UWopNfh0RddkB/yYQulFjZ
	ng9LWTIA==;
Received: from [38.133.51.49] (port=38228 helo=[192.168.1.202])
	by premium58.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa  (TLS1.2) tls
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <debian@polynamaude.com>)
	id 1m1wqo-001LYR-QV; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:11:59 -0400
Subject: Re: MTA (corrected)
From: Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com>
To: Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
References: <1eaaa445-fadb-360c-4d48-1c076729c687@polynamaude.com>
 <YOMKml2tnboHGUi0@wooledge.org>
 <f48681c9-1c8b-a7df-e6cd-0d03ff5bb264@polynamaude.com>
 <20210705135736.GB1672577@zira.vinc17.org>
 <daa4613f-4971-9acb-3b16-b2d21a2d0c00@polynamaude.com>
 <YOM3e5mTmHqwoxL4@wooledge.org>
 <7f15ae5d-4d91-3f32-1493-a9c468a39db9@polynamaude.com>
 <YOM8RvGEK1akP5rm@wooledge.org>
 <8a1e2468-20e0-538d-59d9-fe0401dc96c7@polynamaude.com>
Cc: "User Mailing List (Debian)" <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Message-ID: <5b6656f4-902b-b975-1ebe-095675d4e14f@polynamaude.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:11:49 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8a1e2468-20e0-538d-59d9-fe0401dc96c7@polynamaude.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="dV4TqS38M5U0zIBLIp2kkqlMOSNAz1F0O"
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it
with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - premium58.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.debian.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - polynamaude.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: premium58.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id:
debian@polynamaude.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: premium58.web-hosting.com: debian@polynamaude.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
X-Rc-Virus: 2007-09-13_01
X-Rc-Spam: 2008-11-04_01
Resent-Message-ID: <cupxKxkpKQM.A.ckF.f2K6gB@bendel>
Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
X-Mailing-List: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/777749
X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org
List-Id: <debian-user.lists.debian.org>
List-URL: <https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/>
List-Post: <mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:
<mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe:
<mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
List-Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/5b6656f4-902b-b975-1ebe-095675d4e14f@polynamaude.com
Resent-Date: Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:15 +0000 (UTC)


Arrival-Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 20:12:20 +0200 (CEST)
Reporting-MTA: dns; email.seznam.cz

Final-Recipient: rfc822; forensic@polynamaude.com
Status: 2.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: x-uknown;
Action: x-unknown
Original-Recipient: rfc822; buz.hrach@seznam.cz


-- 
Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside
-Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#237132

From"Kevin N." <kevin@notscheduled.eu>
Date2021-07-09 22:50 +0200
Message-ID<Cz5BE-8aW-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#237128
Not sure if that is the case here, but sometimes mailing list software 
alters the original message headers which then can lead to failed DKIM 
signature checks.


Cheers,

K.


> Hi,
> I've wrote a message regarding my MTA.
> 
> I was thinking it's corrected but...
> 
> Here what I got from the Debian mailing list server
> Got some idea ?
> 
> ------
> 
> 
> This is a spf/dkim authentication-failure report for an email message
> received
>   from IP 82.195.75.100 on Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:12:17 +0200.
> 
> The message below did not meet the sending domain's dmarc policy.
> 
> For more information about this format please see
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6591 .
> 
> 
> Feedback-Type: auth-failure
> User-Agent: szn-mime/2.1.11
> Version: 1
> Original-Mail-From: bounce-debian-user=buz.hrach=seznam.cz@lists.debian.org
> Original-Rcpt-To: buz.hrach@seznam.cz
> Source-Ip: 82.195.75.100
> Reported-Domain: lists.debian.org
> Authentication-Results: email.seznam.cz 1;
> 	spf_align=fail;
> 	dkim_align=fail
> Delivery-Result: delivered
> 
> 
> Received: from bendel.debian.org (bendel.debian.org [82.195.75.100])
> 	by email-smtpd1.ko.seznam.cz (Seznam SMTPD 1.3.125) with ESMTP;
> 	Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:12:17 +0200 (CEST)
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> 	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with QMQP
> 	id D8BBA20C7F; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:15 +0000 (UTC)
> X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-user-request@lists.debian.org  Fri Jul  9
> 20:12:15 2021
> Old-Return-Path: <debian@polynamaude.com>
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on bendel.debian.org
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=4.0
> tests=DIGITS_LETTERS,DKIM_SIGNED,
> 	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,LDOSUBSCRIBER,LDO_WHITELIST,
> 	NICE_REPLY_A,PGPSIGNATURE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
> 	version=3.4.2
> X-Original-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
> Delivered-To: lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> 	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C8E20C6C
> 	for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:08
> +0000 (UTC)
> X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.debian.org with policy bank en-ht
> X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.101 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3
> 	tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DIGITS_LETTERS=1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
> 	DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
> 	LDO_WHITELIST=-5, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, URI_HEX=0.1]
> 	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
> Received: from bendel.debian.org ([127.0.0.1])
> 	by localhost (lists.debian.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 2525)
> 	with ESMTP id 1C8FK9O9R4wF for <lists-debian-user@bendel.debian.org>;
> 	Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:03 +0000 (UTC)
> X-policyd-weight: using cached result; rate: -4.6
> Received: from cyrania.com (cyrania.com [162.213.253.79])
> 	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
> 	(Client did not present a certificate)
> 	by bendel.debian.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41BC220C07
> 	for <debian-user@lists.debian.org>; Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:03 +0000 (UTC)
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
> 	d=polynamaude.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:
> 	Message-ID:Cc:References:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:
> 	Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
> 	Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
> 	List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
> 	bh=+sOBJuEBMYyyn07XmbyL3ZhQgjte6V2z7NjRnO47Q50=;
> b=S1tAbB2sbqI2sRIMXZDfNyhV/m
> 	PQVXycU120Vru+cN7r+ODT2ASB8yZpuSDG4RFNTAF1uG3sl4RG8c2vBLhZs9QKIZ/1rYU6pYAcExM
> 	lXzfSlqCHJY/bG2e3Kc2RN04A3guikgnhbupfSip0DwK1rP7AJIy7zDAm9bJLD2f3RU8dw2z/jgbI
> 	2EKllS6ycufPVqVPX5I38UUVqhG2JwNzK11v3mNAdGIxYxWzVIkCNctHNmzjNFn5ijsowpFlR3i78
> 	I8PX50XsqVs6kaiVfI+hdNt5vO7l5BIAFeiB3aDaqaONRdzCKiuphW8UWopNfh0RddkB/yYQulFjZ
> 	ng9LWTIA==;
> Received: from [38.133.51.49] (port=38228 helo=[192.168.1.202])
> 	by premium58.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa  (TLS1.2) tls
> TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
> 	(Exim 4.94.2)
> 	(envelope-from <debian@polynamaude.com>)
> 	id 1m1wqo-001LYR-QV; Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:11:59 -0400
> Subject: Re: MTA (corrected)
> From: Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com>
> To: Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
> References: <1eaaa445-fadb-360c-4d48-1c076729c687@polynamaude.com>
>   <YOMKml2tnboHGUi0@wooledge.org>
>   <f48681c9-1c8b-a7df-e6cd-0d03ff5bb264@polynamaude.com>
>   <20210705135736.GB1672577@zira.vinc17.org>
>   <daa4613f-4971-9acb-3b16-b2d21a2d0c00@polynamaude.com>
>   <YOM3e5mTmHqwoxL4@wooledge.org>
>   <7f15ae5d-4d91-3f32-1493-a9c468a39db9@polynamaude.com>
>   <YOM8RvGEK1akP5rm@wooledge.org>
>   <8a1e2468-20e0-538d-59d9-fe0401dc96c7@polynamaude.com>
> Cc: "User Mailing List (Debian)" <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> Message-ID: <5b6656f4-902b-b975-1ebe-095675d4e14f@polynamaude.com>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:11:49 -0400
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
>   Thunderbird/78.11.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> In-Reply-To: <8a1e2468-20e0-538d-59d9-fe0401dc96c7@polynamaude.com>
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
>   protocol="application/pgp-signature";
>   boundary="dV4TqS38M5U0zIBLIp2kkqlMOSNAz1F0O"
> X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
> X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it
> with any abuse report
> X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - premium58.web-hosting.com
> X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.debian.org
> X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
> X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - polynamaude.com
> X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: premium58.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id:
> debian@polynamaude.com
> X-Authenticated-Sender: premium58.web-hosting.com: debian@polynamaude.com
> X-Source:
> X-Source-Args:
> X-Source-Dir:
> X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
> X-Rc-Virus: 2007-09-13_01
> X-Rc-Spam: 2008-11-04_01
> Resent-Message-ID: <cupxKxkpKQM.A.ckF.f2K6gB@bendel>
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> X-Mailing-List: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/777749
> X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> List-Id: <debian-user.lists.debian.org>
> List-URL: <https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/>
> List-Post: <mailto:debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe:
> <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=subscribe>
> List-Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:debian-user-request@lists.debian.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender: debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
> List-Archive:
> https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/5b6656f4-902b-b975-1ebe-095675d4e14f@polynamaude.com
> Resent-Date: Fri,  9 Jul 2021 20:12:15 +0000 (UTC)
> 
> 
> Arrival-Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 20:12:20 +0200 (CEST)
> Reporting-MTA: dns; email.seznam.cz
> 
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; forensic@polynamaude.com
> Status: 2.0.0
> Diagnostic-Code: x-uknown;
> Action: x-unknown
> Original-Recipient: rfc822; buz.hrach@seznam.cz
> 
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237148

From<tomas@tuxteam.de>
Date2021-07-10 09:40 +0200
Message-ID<CzfKF-6ny-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#237132

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 11:43:56PM +0300, Kevin N. wrote:
> Not sure if that is the case here, but sometimes mailing list
> software alters the original message headers which then can lead to
> failed DKIM signature checks.

Most probably. This is a known problem. DKIM is (roughly speaking) a
signature over a hash over some of the mail headers. It assumes that
whoever has control over the sender's domain name in DNS can authorize
the sender to send mails[1], because DNS is where the public key for
the check is published.

Now a mailing list has to munge some of the mail headers, thus breaking
the signature. Here[2] is a readable explanation. There's even an
RFC6377[3] for that.

No idea how lists.debian.org handles that.

Cheers

[1] The result is that now a significant fraction of the spam I receive
   has a correct DKIM signature: they use throwaway Google or Hotmail
   accounts. The irony is that those Big Guys are the ones who forced
   us all to implement DKIM to "fight spam", because they'd refuse any
   mail without (now Hotmail and the other Microsoft-fueled providers
   have discovered something even better). Dirty bros. I *hate* them.

[2] https://doc.coker.com.au/internet/dkim-and-mailing-lists/

[3] RFC6377 "DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) and Mailing Lists"
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6377

 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237150

FromReco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net>
Date2021-07-10 09:50 +0200
Message-ID<CzfUl-6rq-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#237128
	Hi.

On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 04:24:42PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:
> Hi,
> I've wrote a message regarding my MTA.
> 
> I was thinking it's corrected but...
> 
> Here what I got from the Debian mailing list server
> Got some idea ?

Your MTA signs these headers:

Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Cc:References:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:
        Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
        Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
        List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;

Of those at least these headers are modified by the list software:

        Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
        List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;

Thus DKIM checks of your e-mails are bound to fail.


I use this set of headers to sign for this list:

In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:User-Agent

It contains everything that's valuable in headers of my e-mails, and my
e-mails to this list usually pass DKIM checks.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237154

FromPolyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com>
Date2021-07-10 12:00 +0200
Message-ID<CzhW9-7GL-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#237150

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

On 2021-07-10 3:46 a.m., Reco wrote:
> 	Hi.
> 
> On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 04:24:42PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've wrote a message regarding my MTA.
>>
>> I was thinking it's corrected but...
>>
>> Here what I got from the Debian mailing list server
>> Got some idea ?
> 
> Your MTA signs these headers:
> 
> Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Cc:References:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:
>         Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
>         Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
>         List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
> 
> Of those at least these headers are modified by the list software:
> 
>         Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
>         List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
> 
> Thus DKIM checks of your e-mails are bound to fail.
> 
I am currently using the email provided by my shared hosting.
For me it's somewhat complex to manage the setup of a email server, even
if I do also rent a bare metal server in a data center.

The installation of software itself is not the problem but I'm worried
it would expose my system to more risk.

I'd need to play a deployment carefully.
> 
> I use this set of headers to sign for this list:
> 
> In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:User-Agent
> 
> It contains everything that's valuable in headers of my e-mails, and my
> e-mails to this list usually pass DKIM checks.
> 
I don't know if I can modify those header myself, I'd need to do some
research on what part of the header is set by my client and which part
is done by the server provided to me by Namecheap
> Reco
> 

-- 
Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside
-Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#237157

FromReco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net>
Date2021-07-10 12:10 +0200
Message-ID<Czi5P-819-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#237154
	Hi.

On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 05:49:44AM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:
> >> Here what I got from the Debian mailing list server
> >> Got some idea ?
> > 
> > Your MTA signs these headers:
> > 
> > Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Cc:References:To:From:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:
> >         Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
> >         Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
> >         List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
> > 
> > Of those at least these headers are modified by the list software:
> > 
> >         Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
> >         List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
> > 
> > Thus DKIM checks of your e-mails are bound to fail.
> > 
> I am currently using the email provided by my shared hosting.

That only means that the current setup of that MTA is unsuitable for the
list.
If you do not control it so you cannot change it - that can only mean
three things:

1) You'll continue to receive DMARC reports each time you send a e-mail
to the list, and they will show failed DKIM checks.

2) Your e-mails that are resent by bendel.d.o will fail DKIM checks, so
you have no guarantees that your e-mails will be received by all
subscribers of this list.

3) And last, but not least - it's up to the receiver MTA do decide what
to do with such broken e-mails - mark them as spam, deny receiving them,
or deliver to the intended addressee.


> For me it's somewhat complex to manage the setup of a email server,

These things require some learning indeed.


> even if I do also rent a bare metal server in a data center.

Whenever an MTA is running on a bare metal, some sort of virtualized
environment or even in a container is hardly relevant.

Reco

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web