I get Received:, but why would Content-Length change in-flight? -MSK
On 10/6/14, 11:01 AM, "Scott Kitterman via dmarc-discuss" <[email protected]> wrote: >With obvious implications for DMARC failures. See the postfix-users >thread >that starts here: > >https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://archives.neohapsis.com/a >rchives/postfix/2014-10/0138.html&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=aZ0x >RzXh0AB20HBCmRph%2Bg%3D%3D%0A&m=lfSYBVH5FDF6rosyLcdxRtbHZp5ZSdRNYpI%2FRX5G >Km4%3D%0A&s=4200de29230600b9387daa6a9396f6c078fbb8a0011afc5ff99f437e767fab >f8 > >It would be helpful if Yahoo! were to dial this back a bit and stick with >the >recommended fields to sign (i.e. drop Received and Content-Length). >Signing >those fields inevitably makes the signatures more fragile. > >Scott K >_______________________________________________ >dmarc-discuss mailing list >[email protected] >https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/li >stinfo/dmarc-discuss&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=aZ0xRzXh0AB20HBCm >Rph%2Bg%3D%3D%0A&m=lfSYBVH5FDF6rosyLcdxRtbHZp5ZSdRNYpI%2FRX5GKm4%3D%0A&s=b >088a07c4fdc10672e30bf29d947b642af222cb0345354759deb4bc760cc36f1 > >NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well >terms >(https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://www.dmarc.org/note_well >.html&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=aZ0xRzXh0AB20HBCmRph%2Bg%3D%3D%0 >A&m=lfSYBVH5FDF6rosyLcdxRtbHZp5ZSdRNYpI%2FRX5GKm4%3D%0A&s=4b0dcd065be5e034 >bb0d6fcf9943fd5db1904b0adf73313b58891bb54979af11) _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
