On > > (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); > Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:30:56 -0700 (PDT) > Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning > [email protected] does not designate 198.252.153.129 > as permitted sender) client-ip=198.252.153.129; > Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; > dkim=pass [email protected] header.s=default > header.b=qrE7M17u; > dkim=pass [email protected] header.s=default > header.b=slw80URk; > dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) [email protected] > header.s=20251104 header.b=jj2HtWtD; > arc=fail (body hash mismatch); > spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning > [email protected] does not designate 198.252.153.129 > as permitted sender) [email protected]; > dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from= > lists.cpunks.org; > dara=neutral [email protected] > Received: from mail.pglaf.org (mail.pglaf.org [69.55.231.143]) > (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) > key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) > (No client certificate requested) > by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ffntf6rXHzDrVJ; > Mon, 23 Mar 2026 22:30:34 +0000 (UTC) > Authentication-Results: mx1.riseup.net; > dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=lists.cpunks.org header.i=@ > lists.cpunks.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=qrE7M17u; > dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.cpunks.org header.i=@ > lists.cpunks.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=slw80URk; > dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; > unprotected) header.d=gmail.com [email protected] header.a=rsa-sha256 > header.s=20251104 header.b=jj2HtWtD; > dkim-atps=neutral > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=lists.cpunks.org; > s=default; t=1774305034; > bh=PeXpWPeSN1BMwvsUiKbX+Ry6/lbJA8igWkWbnKUtpHE=; > h=In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Archive: > List-Help:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Subscribe:List-Unsubscribe: > From:Reply-To:From; > b=qrE7M17uSpghZ92wFMY0TpSd/Izcxifr2IvwlnAdNKHL5ejByawa9TKp7SVUmSRRs > 4fu/yxgaec94/IIvTr4cfzftS9l78szAqh38U4DuHwgZlSv7Iff88zb2wvK3Rx/xRu > qvzplmWYBplO8r7dfn8IR0E2gpOAH8DFqqzGEybGO8rLaIEqeDZwefk00eDLsobT+b > as0D12IJoGhDbOZCt0KpAkjewqI6yBE8xu9QF8rzkkM08M3XppHsBPhg8BaSGBPRMs > U4ABMh5RPbm69fnRzQc31bQrg717vc8jGvH+aWuPqzZtwwaHd9FkSqsNViJHv/x0y4 > yumSixmKGvxcw== > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by mail.pglaf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D5A1940FB1; > Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:30:34 -0700 (PDT) > X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavis at mail.pglaf.org > X-Spam-Flag: NO > X-Spam-Score: 0 > X-Spam-Level: > X-Spam-Status: No, score=x tagged_above=-999 required=3 WHITELISTED > tests=[] > autolearn=unavailable > Authentication-Results: mail.pglaf.org (amavis); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) > header.d=lists.cpunks.org header.b="slw80URk"; dkim=fail (2048-bit key) > reason="fail (message has been altered)" >
these things about dkim and message verification failing indicate to me there's no reason to assume it's greg i don't know what they mean yet :/ but it's more same old for me, i remember as a teen all my tcp checksums would fail a cryptographic signature is kinda more serious though possibly suspecting now some bytes in the attachment were getting fiddled (like a poor sequence that matches an escape edge case) who knows! but usually people assume a malicious actor when sig failures are seen. this device already known compromised.
