From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id ECC2E3858C50; Mon, 2 Jan 2023 17:06:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ECC2E3858C50 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1672679194; bh=o+a0P2xofYN74rxyf7iRBad4IvkeeTO5mCsTkJWaS7Q=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=RALV0dpOBxsCyUP05O3PeLGKpS3R0YKynO8A2sLWscxDdVCrrl40dC+wrd22YBkEu 28QIr/l7/P2dzB0XCPY6C/4FuhWrd44e3v4b4jbuN//HkNbpcJ2+8o29yo4wiruiNE 4DKCODa1R3UOumbLJYz8AerQ2Rn0dNuthK9PDCKQ= From: "fweimer at redhat dot com" To: overseers@sourceware.org Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyBJbmZyYXN0cnVjdHVyZS8yOTcxM10gUGxlYXNlIG1ha2Ug?= =?UTF-8?B?bGliYy1hbHBoYSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgY29tcGF0aWJsZSB3aXRoIOKAnGdp?= =?UTF-8?B?dCBhbeKAnQ==?= Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2023 17:06:34 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: sourceware X-Bugzilla-Component: Infrastructure X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: fweimer at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: overseers at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29713 --- Comment #36 from Florian Weimer --- (In reply to Frank Ch. Eigler from comment #35) > > This is somewhat disappointing since this seems against the spec. These > > headers shouldn't be included by default if they aren't set on the orig= inal > > outgoing message. >=20 > The RFC4871 standard allows more and non-existent headers to be signed. I > suppose one argument is that signing non-existent headers protects email > against later insertion of such headers. Characterizing this default as > "wrong" or a "misconfiguration" in need of a "fix" is a little too far.=20 > They are inconvenient for the efforts associated with this PR, that's all. Asserting the non-existence of these headers is what breaks DKIM signatures with mailing lists. I reported this upstream-upstream here: Signed header defaults break mailing lists If Exim (or pdkim really) are unwilling to fix this, Mailman (or something = in front of Mailman) needs to be taught to strip such anti-mailing-list DKIM signatures. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=