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/