Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature
От | Stefan Kaltenbrunner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7dc59cb9-3b4b-4658-8707-a72a8abe33a4@kaltenbrunner.cc обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #18822: mailing lists reject mails due to DKIM-signature (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 22.02.25 18:25, Tom Lane wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes: >> On 22.02.25 17:56, Matthias Apitz wrote: >>> Have you read what the RFC 6576 specifies about exactly this case? > >> we are a forwarder that (in the case of a List-* header) NEEDS to modify >> the message so we cannot forward it without breaking. > > Yeah. Regardless of what may be written in the RFC, there are only > these possibilities when the mailing list forwarder receives a > message like this: > > 1. Add the PG list headers, don't touch the DKIM header, forward. > Most modern recipients will reject the result as spam because it > fails DKIM checks. > > 2. Don't add the PG list headers, don't touch the DKIM header, > forward. Many list recipients will discard or at least > misclassify the result for lack of PG list headers. > > 3. Add the PG list headers, discard the DKIM header, forward. > This may well end up marked as spam too, and it's certainly > not complying with the intent of DKIM. > > 4. Reject the message. > > To the extent that including List-* in a DKIM signature has any > real-world use, it is precisely to disavow the message if it's > forwarded by a mailing list. > > The short answer here is that your ISP are fools, or else are > intentionally preventing their users from participating in > mailing lists. exactly (and thanks for the roundup of our "non"-options). There is basically nothing we can do about that other than recommending a different ISP or one of the myriads of free mail providers out there that get this right. Stefan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: