Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)
Hi.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +0000, Andy Smith wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:08:14PM +0200, l0f4r0@tuta.io wrote:
> > 13 juin 2020 à 09:52 de andy@strugglers.net:
> > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From"
> > > quoted with a ">".
> > >
> > Indeed! I hope it's not a mistake of mine (usually I proofread my emails before sending them but who knows...).
>
> It was almost certainly done by Debian's mailing list software.
It was definitely done by Debian's mailing list software.
It looks like this:
1) bendel.debian.org (postfix) receives the e-mail in question from
w4.tutanota.de.
2) bendel (postfix) feeds incoming e-mail to bendel (amavisd), which
reports that DKIM is OK:
X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, ... DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1 ...
3) bendel (amavisd) tosses e-mail back to bendel (postfix), which tosses
it in turn to bendel (spamassassin).
4) The latter reports that DKIM test failed:
X-Spam-Status: No, ... tests=DIGITS_LETTERS,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED
5) bendel (spamassassin) tosses the e-mail to bendel (postfix) again,
the latter does the delivery. DKIM test fails again:
Authentication-Results: w3.tutanota.de (dis=spam; info=dmarc domain policy); dmarc=fail (dis=spam p=quarantine; aspf=r; adkim=s; pSrc=dns) header.from=tuta.io; dkim=fail reason="body hash does not match"
Reco
Reply to: