Mime-version was listed as a signed header but was absent. I suspect his header checks cleaned that out.
Note that having a header listed in the H equals list, but having that header be absent is legal, but I don’t know why the signing software would say it’s signing that header when it’s not there. especially for a mailing list generator that presumably generates lots of the same thing. -Dan Sent from my iPhone > On May 10, 2025, at 09:41, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users > <postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote: > > >> >> Dnia 9.05.2025 o godz. 16:18:35 Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users >> pisze: >>> I use pyspf-milter which is from the same package I believe (python, >>> there's also perl version policyd-spf) and it only accepts/rejects >>> e-mail and adds Authentication-Results: header. > >> On 09.05.25 16:41, Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote: >> Check if mails that are failing DKIM: >> - already contain "Authentication-Results:" header before being processed by >> pyspf-milter, and that header is DKIM signed >> or > > Authentication-Results was not signed in OP's mail... > >>> Question: aren't those mails failing DKIM from mailing lists? >>> Because that is quite often case where DKIM does not pass. >> >> That may be a completely different issue. > > exactly, I just wanted to be sure if the problem si not misunderstood - I > also receive many invalid DKIM headers from mailing lists, because my DMARC > policy is none and mailman2 in that case often does not rewrite From: header > > >> On 09.05.25 17:17, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote: >> Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users skrev den 2025-05-09 16:18: > [...] >> your mail gives this result here > > Benny, you should read mail more carefully. I am not the OP and don't have > the problem. > >> On 09.05.25 17:00, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote: >> Consider replacing policyd-spf, opendkim, AND opendmarc with rspamd. It >> does all of those jobs, does them *better*, and is actively maintained. > > This advice is irelevant, because none of the mentioned software causes the > issue and thus changing them is not going to fix it. > >> On 10.05.25 09:12, Ken Biggs via Postfix-users wrote: >> Woo hoo! I think I found the issue! I'm guessing this is probably an >> obvious thing, but I went line by line through my main.cf and found: >> >> mime_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks >> header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks >> >> Not sure when I added those (it's been quite a while), but commenting them >> out seems to have resolved the issue! > > just do ls -l /etc/postfix/header_checks > >> I'm not sure if I need to be doing the header checks a different way. >> Recommendations would be appreciated. >> >> Thank you to everyone! Your input and help finally got me looking in the >> right places for the right things! The users on this mailing list are >> amazing! > > It's not the checks what caused your problem, it was something in those > checks. I am now curious: > Which headers did you add/modify/delete, which caused DKIM to fail? > > > -- > Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ > Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. > Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. > Spam = (S)tupid (P)eople's (A)dvertising (M)ethod > _______________________________________________ > Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org > To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org _______________________________________________ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
