From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Nov 27 20:46:16 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C1F1137F11 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:46:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from johnl@iecc.com) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "gal.iecc.com", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B05906CB87 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:46:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from johnl@iecc.com) Received: (qmail 34676 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2018 20:46:13 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=8770.5bfdad15.k1811; bh=0dZ3LLIbvfoDQoNjtEuBxa+8ufglo0fDaOms38Onzu0=; b=p9ZxNWDhIT4wD4BP92rDOXF5myCI90TwSKTVhi4AqlHFpbuGgf01BfCjta47g3+n0iyr3VwXO7B2x+Dwx1za4Rk5XO7DV7UmhJsuTLxCw3rbzEZXULzXncXOvymCD7VE1QjotMAo7q05ZyhdU9tOhVJnrhbWUE/IBRI/82EP/ldN9WeoXrce3mTtEmGHLcwR1VnRHgEBw2QHjMHY12k60aeAtp+Q4JaVKfsH5AzGjm1faLxeTMc+2TIc1dbmxHqr Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 27 Nov 2018 20:46:13 -0000 Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 1012C2008F10BE; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 15:46:12 -0500 (EST) Date: 27 Nov 2018 15:46:12 -0500 Message-Id: <20181127204613.1012C2008F10BE@ary.qy> From: "John Levine" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Subject: Re: Invalid DKIM signatures in this list In-Reply-To: <6917758579217e9588f5610bb77c9c79.squirrel@webmail.harte-lyne.ca> Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B05906CB87 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.12 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[iecc.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2001:470:1f07:1126::/64]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[iecc.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[iecc.com,none]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[mx.iecc.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.992,0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-1.62)[ipnet: 2001:470::/32(-4.50), asn: 6939(-3.49), country: US(-0.09)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6939, ipnet:2001:470::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Server: mx1.freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:46:16 -0000 In article <6917758579217e9588f5610bb77c9c79.squirrel@webmail.harte-lyne.ca> you write: >A lot of people cared. You can visit the IETF mailing list and read >through the reams of discussion regarding the negative impact that >DKIM would have on mailing lists. I'm reasonably sure you're confusing DKIM and DMARC. DKIM creates no problems for mailing lists unless the lists go out of their way to do something wrong. DMARC, on the other hand, has been bad news ever since AOL and Yahoo started misusing it to push the costs of their subscriber data breaches on the rest of the world. R's, John