On 2019-04-28 at 16:42 +0100, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev wrote:
> Do the DKIM exim experts subscribe to the mailop list ?
I do, but I just started a new job and am behind on public
mailing-lists.
> There is an ongoing discussion on the mai...@mailop.org
> about a snafu with DKIM which
On 30 Apr 2019, at 00:03, Jeremy Harris via Exim-dev wrote:
> Bzzt.
>
> Stop right there.
>
> The ML adds body content. This will invalidate the signature.
>
> The header thing, even if you do game it, will not help that.
*shrug*
I was merely explaining the cogent points of the discussion
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 01:33:09PM -0600, Brielle Bruns via Exim-dev wrote:
> Version: 4.92-2~bpo9+1
>
> My configuration files are ancient. IIRC, I originally built them from the
> debian config back around 2005 or 2006 (We've actually been using exim since
> 2003). They got updated over the
On 4/29/2019 5:00 PM, Jeremy Harris via Exim-dev wrote:
You'll get the default headers signed, then. That includes signing
the lack-of-presence of a header in the set.
However: it's irrelevant. The ML adding a header making the signature
bad does not matter. The ML also appends to the
On 29/04/2019 20:06, Graeme Fowler via Exim-dev wrote:
> On 29 Apr 2019, at 19:26, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev
> wrote:
>> I will do so, either here or in that bug, when I can do so without causing
>> more heat.
>
> The gist of the discussion (I’m a mailop subscriber) is manyfold:
>
> 1.
On 29/04/2019 20:33, Brielle Bruns via Exim-dev wrote:
> Heya, original cause of the havoc on mailop here!
>
> I'll try and answer whatever questions I can. See below.
>
>
> On 2019-04-29 19:06, Graeme Fowler wrote:> So *either* the
> Debian-derived configuration (of which the original poster
Heya, original cause of the havoc on mailop here!
I'll try and answer whatever questions I can. See below.
On 2019-04-29 19:06, Graeme Fowler wrote:> So *either* the
Debian-derived configuration (of which the original poster mentioned
they were using unaltered for DKIM purposes, inheriting
On 29/04/2019 20:06, Graeme Fowler via Exim-dev wrote:
> The gist of the discussion (I’m a mailop subscriber) is manyfold:
> 4. Signed messages inbound to mailop.org (and other lists!) from
> Debian-derived and other setups using the default macro defined in pdkim.h
> can have headers added
On 29 Apr 2019, at 19:26, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev
wrote:
> I will do so, either here or in that bug, when I can do so without causing
> more heat.
The gist of the discussion (I’m a mailop subscriber) is manyfold:
1. Google accept messages over IPv6 but require stricter verification
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev wrote:
Do the DKIM exim experts subscribe to the mailop list ?
In https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2394 Simon Arlott suggests that the answer is
"no".
In that case (and especially since the links below are on a server which
has an
On 28/04/2019 16:42, Andrew C Aitchison via Exim-dev wrote:
> Do the DKIM exim experts subscribe to the mailop list ?
>
> There is an ongoing discussion on the mai...@mailop.org
> about a snafu with DKIM which implicates exim and google.
>
> The original report of the snafu (google rejections
Do the DKIM exim experts subscribe to the mailop list ?
There is an ongoing discussion on the mai...@mailop.org
about a snafu with DKIM which implicates exim and google.
The original report of the snafu (google rejections caused the list to
auto-unsubscribe over a hundred subscribers of the
12 matches
Mail list logo
