Re: PSA: Messages sent through LA mailing lists being classified as SPAM

Russell Coker <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.australia
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:05:27 PM Joel W. Shea wrote:
> > The biggest problem at the moment is that Mailman rewrote the DKIM
> > signature header to use spaces instead of tabs.  While it seems to be
> > standards compliant to rewrite headers like that both OpenDKIM and
> > libmail-dkim-perl will report such messages as invalid.
> 
> Except that this particular message was signed with "c=relaxed/relaxed",
> so should still validate with spaces, otherwise you're right, since many
> leave the default "c=simple/simple"

http://www.gettingemaildelivered.com/dkim-explained-how-to-set-up-and-use-
domainkeys-identified-mail-effectively

For the benefit of others the above URL explains these things.

My tests indicate that setting relaxed/simple is enough.  To get that put one 
of the following lines in /etc/opendkim.conf:

Canonicalization relaxed
Canonicalization relaxed/simple

> > If we wanted the list to pass messages with valid DKIM signatures then
> > here is what needs to be done:
> > 
> > 1)  Turn off Subject munging.
> > 2)  Turn off the list footer.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > 3)  Make Mailman not munge the DKIM header - or install a milter that
> > reverses such munging (which is quite trivial in terms of message
> > editing).
> 
> Alternatively, make Mailman reject the message with a DMARC failure
> report, and hope that the sender signs with "c=relaxed/simple" to allow
> whitespace variation in the header in future.

I don't think that there is any feature of Mailman to do this and I don't 
think it would be desirable to do so.  But making mailman not munge the 
headers would be a good feature to have.

> > But it's much easier to just change the From: header to the list address.
> 
> Perhaps, since even if DKIM signature verifies, DMARC will still fail
> domain alignment on SPF?

It seems that there is no option other than changing the From header.

> > It's expected that when you add new anti-spam features that there will be
> > some false positives.  But everyone else will just deal with it
> > eventually, and that includes list servers configuration being changed
> > to work with it.
> 
> Hence the recommendation to set DMARC to p=none at first, then
> q=quarantine; pct=1; then gradually increase pct, this gives the sender
> an opportunity to adjust their policy to accommodate for the most common
> false positive failures.

Well we know that the Linux Australia lists are one source of false positives.  
We just need to get that fixed.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.