Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)
Hi,
13 juin 2020 à 21:14 de recoverym4n@enotuniq.net:
> You're looking at the wrong header. It's X-Spam-Status and
> X-Amavis-Spam-Status you should worry about. Authetication-Results is
> set by your MTA receiving your own mail from the list.
>
> But yes, they are both OK for this and your previous e-mails.
>
Ok, thanks but still confusing...
> Which one of these is under your control btw, w3.tutanota.de or
> w4.tutanota.de?
>
None, these are domains from my email provider.
I don't own any email infrastructure myself...
14 juin 2020 à 17:13 de deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk:
> On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f4r0@tuta.io wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I was not aware of this.
>> However, this extra ">" should have been deleted upon viewing the email, no?
>>
> How would the viewer's email client know whether the > in
> >From had been added by some such scheme as above and should
> be removed, or was a genuine occurrence in the original email?
>
If ">" was intentional, then it could have been escaped with an additional ">".
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbox#Family:
" >From my point of view...
In the mboxo format, such lines have irreversible ambiguity. In the mboxo format, this can lead to corruption of the message. If a line already contained >From at the beginning (such as in a quotation), it is unchanged when written. When subsequently read by the mail software, the leading > is erroneously removed. The mboxrd format solves this by converting From to >From and converting >From to >>From , etc. The transformation is then always reversible."
l0f4r0
Reply to: