Erik Lotspeich wrote: > It seems that as DKIM becomes more prevalent, this issue will come up more > and more. I'm not an expert on mailing lists, but does it make sense for > mailing lists to change their behavior in response to DKIM?
Seeing as quite a few mailing lists alter the messages (adding footers, tags, and sometimes even ads), stripping signatures should continue. The alternative would be to leave the signatures even though verification is virtually guaranteed to fail. To me it makes a lot of sense for verifiers to change their behaviour when there are clear signs that a message has been forwarded by a mailing list. We verify in our general anti-spam filter. That filter acts differently on failed verifications if it find some list headers (for example List-*). > For example, > the From could be the list e-mail address (like the "To:" field is today). > The "To:" field could be the name of the actual recipient as in a direct > message. It seems that would solve the issue from the DKIM perspective. Seeing that people have discussed what list managers should put in the Reply-To: for years without agreeing, I don't think you should hope for a consensus on another address swap/change. Regards /Jonas -- Jonas Eckerman, FSDB & Fruktträdet http://whatever.frukt.org/ http://www.fsdb.org/ http://www.frukt.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ dkim-milter-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dkim-milter-discuss
