IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC vs p=quarantine

Benny Pedersen <me@junc.eu> Tue, 22 December 2020 02:37 UTC

Return-Path: <me@junc.eu>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C913A0858 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:37:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=junc.eu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GVJtgMwdd6-y for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:37:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.junc.eu (mx.junc.eu [172.105.72.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A4013A0855 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:37:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost.junc.eu (localhost.junc.eu [127.0.0.1]) by mx.junc.eu (Postfix) with SMTP id 3498880519 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 02:37:52 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=junc.eu; i=@junc.eu; l=936; q=dns/txt; s=default; t=1608604672; h=from : subject : date : to; bh=qillzelswaYhCUFohCdvhYZnjKipa5vzGHlcfDkhMCw=; b=g4EQTGEUBot2Ii9TfC4UWlAsKjuApT4EwtQHcSQnPbrnCcHSNraHmXDWzU0WIkXUaOXex 73vM0PzquEA7FV1qu9/ICyc+1Bez6SUz5zjLRImo+aUs2ecNaW81C8TvaZKm5SHpS0T+TkG P/v3UYZHnavxIv9vTgq/BjgeksOWo+8=
Received: from localhost.junc.eu (localhost.junc.eu [IPv6:::1]) by mx.junc.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 184A87FEE0 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 02:37:52 +0000 (UTC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 03:37:52 +0100
From: Benny Pedersen <me@junc.eu>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <8c6c4f7f-4a95-cd2b-306e-83a50dcde385@tana.it>
References: <1e61f7c4-c6d2-5dab-dfc7-f1fd740e1d0d@tana.it> <20201219194954.BF87E2ADF1FB@ary.qy> <CAJ4XoYfx=qRyARbcf7m8T6+_2hJKifgAoBXBdfmqGucanrUJfw@mail.gmail.com> <9b7cc1c9-e031-4ef8-8d92-2c16cc4fa073@tana.it> <dd6c5588-8e84-5f90-931-51b4dd4c27cc@taugh.com> <ceaf2e324f8cf042b1b31621c79d5d59@junc.eu> <a8218ce4-cd73-dec4-44a0-b77eb0546a14@mtcc.com> <496c92bc02e75c2d7b02365d9dd0cf38@junc.eu> <8c6c4f7f-4a95-cd2b-306e-83a50dcde385@tana.it>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.8
Message-ID: <e45dcf3f5ac2abecd48aae0839a53c91@junc.eu>
X-Sender: me@junc.eu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/sDXHT_Oqe_UR2lWXwRC_FejjWgY>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC vs p=quarantine
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 02:37:57 -0000

On 2020-12-21 18:27, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Mon 21/Dec/2020 01:52:11 +0100 Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> On 2020-12-20 23:07, Michael Thomas wrote:
>>> On 12/20/20 2:01 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:

> For the message I'm replying to, I got:
> 
> Authentication-Results: wmail.tana.it;
>   spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ietf.org;
>   dkim=pass reason="Original-From: transformed" (whitelisted) 
> header.d=junc.eu;
>   dkim=pass (whitelisted) header.d=ietf.org
>     header.b=GUNfiCpP;
>   dkim=fail (signature verification failed, whitelisted) 
> header.d=ietf.org
>     header.b=IIMQxhd+
> 
> Two out of three is not bad, is it?  If IETF only did ARC seals, I'd
> probably verified no signature at all —since I don't run ARC checks.

metacpan Mail::DKIM gives dkim invalid if just one dkim is invalid, so 
spamassassin says aswell dkim invalid

what software used above to show this results ?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email