[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-05-03 Thread Tim Coote via Postfix-users
Further investigation showed that the issue is in Python 2.7’s `email` module. Although this is out of support, I’d expect some to be lying around and thought it worth mentioning to this group. Specifically, `email.Message.__str__()`. It seems ok in python3 > On 2 May 2024, at 12:53, Tim

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-05-02 Thread Bill Cole via Postfix-users
On 2024-05-02 at 07:53:15 UTC-0400 (Thu, 2 May 2024 12:53:15 +0100) Tim Coote via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: What would have helped - and I’ve no idea how feasible this is - would be some tooling to pull out different versions of the message as they flow through the queues. This

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-05-02 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
On 02.05.24 12:53, Tim Coote via Postfix-users wrote: I think that I’ve now fixed this in my domain, so I thought I’d just note the route to finding it, more as a comment on the complexity of working out what’s going on. After making a simple robot to send emails with long headers and

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-05-02 Thread Tim Coote via Postfix-users
I think that I’ve now fixed this in my domain, so I thought I’d just note the route to finding it, more as a comment on the complexity of working out what’s going on. After making a simple robot to send emails with long headers and demonstrating how they broke in my production environment, I

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-30 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4vtb9v00wbzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: |> But one thing is plain, if lines get folded "artificially" to |> satisfy line length limits, then this is a whitespace that DKIM |> will see, and if it was not in the

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-30 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: > But one thing is plain, if lines get folded "artificially" to > satisfy line length limits, then this is a whitespace that DKIM > will see, and if it was not in the original message, the signature > will break. After the DKIM signature is generated, the

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-30 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4vtlbf3vz0zj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Postfix does not store line endings internally, because different |environments have different line ending conventions (for example |SMTP has while UNIX has ). Postfix strips line endings |on input, and adds

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-30 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
John Levine wrote in <20240430015342.8DF9C89B9BE7@ary.local>: |It appears that Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users \ |said: |W> |I did not want to insult you! |>|In mind i had these canon..py snippets |>| |>| def strip_trailing_whitespace(content): |>|return re.sub(b"[\t ]+\r\n",

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-30 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Postfix does not store line endings internally, because different environments have different line ending conventions (for example SMTP has while UNIX has ). Postfix strips line endings on input, and adds them on output. Postfix was modeled after routers with different kinds of network

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread John Levine via Postfix-users
It appears that Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users said: W> |I did not want to insult you! > |In mind i had these canon..py snippets > | > | def strip_trailing_whitespace(content): > |return re.sub(b"[\t ]+\r\n", b"\r\n", content) > | > | > | def compress_whitespace(content): > |return

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote in <20240429215451.hPgOZwzc@steffen%sdaoden.eu>: |Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users wrote in | <53d75fd8-e109-4712-ba9c-4ea07aa2b...@kitterman.com>: ||On April 29, 2024 9:27:20 PM UTC, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users \ || wrote: ||>Tim Coote via

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4vstkr2gkhzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: |> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in |> <4vsq5f6q3nzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |>|Tim Coote via Postfix-users: |> .. |>|> SMTP headers are often 'folded' as they

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users wrote in <53d75fd8-e109-4712-ba9c-4ea07aa2b...@kitterman.com>: |On April 29, 2024 9:27:20 PM UTC, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users \ | wrote: |>Tim Coote via Postfix-users wrote in |> : ... |>|That’s why I formed a hypothesis that (my) Postfix had changed

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Scott Kitterman via Postfix-users
On April 29, 2024 9:27:20 PM UTC, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote: >Tim Coote via Postfix-users wrote in > : > |Thanks very much for the detailed response. My original issue was why \ > |dkim signatures were failing on some emails from email lists when arriving \ > |at my Postfix

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Tim Coote via Postfix-users wrote in : |Thanks very much for the detailed response. My original issue was why \ |dkim signatures were failing on some emails from email lists when arriving \ |at my Postfix based domain (postfix-3.4.10-1.fc30.x86_64 - I know it \ |needs updating: and that may

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Tim Coote via Postfix-users
Thanks very much for the detailed response. My original issue was why dkim signatures were failing on some emails from email lists when arriving at my Postfix based domain (postfix-3.4.10-1.fc30.x86_64 - I know it needs updating: and that may be the only reasonable answer). I have only seen

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in > <4vsq5f6q3nzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: > |Tim Coote via Postfix-users: > .. > |> SMTP headers are often 'folded' as they flow through MTAs. The > |> standard approach to folding and unfolding is covered in rfcs

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4vsq5f6q3nzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Tim Coote via Postfix-users: .. |> SMTP headers are often 'folded' as they flow through MTAs. The |> standard approach to folding and unfolding is covered in rfcs 5322 ... |3) Lines that exceed 998 bytes (not

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Tim Coote via Postfix-users: > Hullo > > I've recently stumbled across this issue and wondered if it's a/ > common, b/ how it can be addressed. > > SMTP headers are often 'folded' as they flow through MTAs. The > standard approach to folding and unfolding is covered in rfcs 5322 > and is relied

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread Tim Coote via Postfix-users
I mostly agree - I’ve been using Postfix for a long while now. But something is folding headers in my domain and failing DKIM that don’t get folded by gmail and which, if I manually unfold and remove the extra space do get signature agreement. Here’s an example: List-Unsubscribe:

[pfx] Re: long header folding and DKIM fails

2024-04-29 Thread David Bürgin via Postfix-users
Remember that Postfix has supported DKIM via various milters for 15+ years without issues. So no, practically there is no problem with DKIM and header folding in Postfix. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an