I'd suggest that reliance upon ADSP is unwise as - having being reclassified as 
historic - it could stop working at any time without warning. A better option 
might be to sign your reports with the DKIM signature of the reporting domain 
(i.e. sign with example.eu instead of example.com in your obscured example).


- Roland

________________________________
From: dmarc-discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of SheridanJ 
West via dmarc-discuss <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, 1 February 2017 00:53
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] opendkim-atpszone reproducibility and examples


i appear to need atps records for google this is with atps dns text records and 
probably others

opendmarc-reports: sent report for gmail.com<http://gmail.com> to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> (2.0.0 Ok: 
queued as x1)
Gmail<http://gmail.com/>
gmail.com
Gmail is email that's intuitive, efficient, and useful. 15 GB of storage, less 
spam, and mobile access.



postfix/smtp[28130]: x2: 
to=<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
relay=aspmx.l.google.com<http://aspmx.l.google.com>[66.102.1.26]:25, delay=0.87,
delays=0.13/0.01/0.25/0.48, dsn=2.0.0,
status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK xx xx - gsmtp)

without atps [results i got from last week]

postfix/smtp[5820]:
 x0: to=<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
relay=aspmx.l.google.com<http://aspmx.l.google.com>[74.125.71.26]:25, delay=1.1,
 delays=0.13/0.01/0.49/0.43, dsn=5.7.1, status=bounced
(host aspmx.l.google.com<http://aspmx.l.google.com>[74.125.71.26] said: 
550-5.7.1
Unauthenticated email from example.eu<http://example.eu>  is not accepted
due to 550-5.7.1 domain's DMARC policy.
Please contact the administrator of 550-5.7.1 example.eu<http://example.eu>
domain if this was a legitimate mail.

I used (appears to work) dns records

 _adsp._domainkey.example.eu<http://domainkey.example.eu>.      "dkim=all 
atps=y; asl=example.com<http://example.com>;"
<sha1 of 
example.com<http://example.com>>._atps.example.eu<http://atps.example.eu>. 
"v=atps01; d=example.com<http://example.com>;"

not work (or tried yet) the content made by openmarc-atpszone

v=ATPS1; d=example.net<http://example.net>

The windows version appears to be the winner for syntax of atps.

although i can get sha1 domain name hashes from both with.

opendkim-atpszone -h sha1 -u example.com<http://example.com> -A 
example.net<http://example.net>


So most of opendkim-atpszone is best ignored it appears


On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Juri Haberland via dmarc-discuss 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
SheridanJ West via dmarc-discuss wrote:
> I encountered a opendmarc bug that required adsp records as well to send
> dmarc reports and i had a fun time trying to reproduce the output for i do
> not know how long the url i mention will last.

> Is nearly the same but I am confused - is the web parser right and the
> opendkim-atpszone command wrong? with v=ATPS1

> I ask as this affects only dmarc reports (no i do not run 
> example.com<http://example.com>) our
> normal email is sent ok

Even though this is not an OpenDMARC specific mailing list but a generic DMARC
discussion list, can you be a bit more specific in which way OpenDMARC reports
are affected by the differing output of the webtool vs. opendkim-atpszone?

  Juri

_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[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)

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to