On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 05:34:12PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 04:15:19PM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:
> Fine, but it is yet to be seen that the quoted message is rejected for
> being "spam" (which is not an exact science), it could also be rejected
> for having a broken DKIM signature (which may be checked automatically),
> as the email is clearly modified by the list server.
I've never seen rejected email from gmail's SMTP due to broken DKIM.
AFAICT it just puts them in Spam (and only for the domains that enforce
DKIM to be valid).
OTOH, in my rely mail hosts I often see messagges like this:
[wrapped for convenience]
Sep 5 07:42:41 kahlan postfix/smtp[25940]: C67BF41796:
to=<mapreri@gmail.com>, orig_to=<mattia@mapreri.org>,
relay=alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.222.26]:25, delay=248373,
delays=248370/0.08/2.6/0.27, dsn=4.7.0, status=deferred (host
alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[173.194.222.26] said: 421-4.7.0
[95.85.2.163 15] Our system has detected that this message is
421-4.7.0 suspicious due to the nature of the content and/or the links
within. 421-4.7.0 To best protect our users from spam, the message has
been blocked. 421-4.7.0 Please visit 421 4.7.0
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/188131 for more information.
24si4125534ljb.48 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command))
Usually those kind of emails stick there and postfix keeps trying them
until they eventually hit the timeout and my rely rejects them too.
> The "[Python-modules-team]" thing in the subject is probably enough to
> break the DKIM signature.
also the footer, if there is one, as it's default of mailman.
> We should really not be sending messages having broken signatures to
> the outside world, including our own email inboxes.
~all mailman mailing lists distributes messagges with broken DKIM
signatures since the conception, the world did not end. It's plain
annoying only for the very few domains that enforce them (notabily:
yahoo, but I stopped caring for it).
> And email users subscribed to one or more mailing lists should really
> use email filters to filter email, not rely on this obnoxious subject
> munging.
yes.
> More to the point, when you subscribe to a mailing list, you should be
> ready to accept all messages from such mailing list, not accept some
> messages and reject others.
I agree gmail is broken there (and not only there), though I'm still an
user too...
The correct behaviour if they really want to avoid spam to even reach
the spam folder, is to accept the email, and discard it.
Mattia,
whom suffers from this for the debian-science-maintainers ML.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature