1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1Z5t27-0002pM-Hk
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:56:23 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.174 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.174; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f174.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Z5t26-0005ES-E1
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:56:23 +0000
Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so13619660wic.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.59.98 with SMTP id y2mr24440751wjq.42.1434707776430;
Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.14.196 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 02:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAEz79PoDn+-aDkqSfPeQFUjYDEDEhSrJ2mFYcbitHBf4oADBSg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEz79PoDn+-aDkqSfPeQFUjYDEDEhSrJ2mFYcbitHBf4oADBSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 11:56:16 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: T5f4Kr3uSUNzZKnU10MwtrE4uRU
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3vut8uYWeeynLdwvSM56eXZZdgidaEgcvg1FNMye6P9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: "Warren Togami Jr." <wtogami@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba978a05ee7240518dbef29
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Z5t26-0005ES-E1
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mailman incompatibility with DKIM ...
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:56:23 -0000
--047d7ba978a05ee7240518dbef29
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> We already removed the footer because it was incompatible with DKIM
> signing. Keeping the "[Bitcoin-dev] " prepend tag in subject is compatible
> with DKIM header signing only if the poster manually prepends it in their
> subject header.
>
I still see footers being added to this list by SourceForge?
> Opinions?
>
I've asked Jeff to not use his @bitpay.com account for now.
The only real fix is to use a mailing list operator that is designed to
operate correctly with DKIM/DMARC, either by not modifying messages in
transit, or by re-sending (and ideally re-signing) under their own identity.
Though I'm sure this won't be an issue for the Linux Foundation, the latter
approach is dangerous because it means the list operator takes full
responsibility for any spamming that occurs from that domain. If the mail
server is ever hacked or spammers start posting to the lists themselves,
all that spam will be seen as originating from the listserv itself and the
reputation will be degraded. It can end with everyone's mail going to the
spam folder.
--047d7ba978a05ee7240518dbef29
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">We already removed the footer b=
ecause it was incompatible with DKIM signing.=C2=A0 Keeping the "[Bitc=
oin-dev] " prepend tag in subject is compatible with DKIM header signi=
ng only if the poster manually prepends it in their subject header.</div></=
blockquote><div><br></div><div>I still see footers being added to this list=
by SourceForge?</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div>Opinions?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>=
I've asked Jeff to not use his @<a href=3D"http://bitpay.com">bitpay.co=
m</a> account for now.</div><div><br></div><div>The only real fix is to use=
a mailing list operator that is designed to operate correctly with DKIM/DM=
ARC, either by not modifying messages in transit, or by re-sending (and ide=
ally re-signing) under their own identity.</div><div><br></div><div>Though =
I'm sure this won't be an issue for the Linux Foundation, the latte=
r approach is dangerous because it means the list operator takes full respo=
nsibility for any spamming that occurs from that domain. If the mail server=
is ever hacked or spammers start posting to the lists themselves, all that=
spam will be seen as originating from the listserv itself and the reputati=
on will be degraded. It can end with everyone's mail going to the spam =
folder.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
--047d7ba978a05ee7240518dbef29--
|
