Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious

Steve Atkins <steve@wordtothewise.com> Thu, 23 July 2020 10:07 UTC

Return-Path: <steve@wordtothewise.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4633A0593 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=wordtothewise.com
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 pRCQPaeuVCWq for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.wordtothewise.com (mail.wordtothewise.com [104.225.223.158]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AECB43A053E for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.206] (unknown [37.228.245.144]) by mail.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A78889F149 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=wordtothewise.com; s=aardvark; t=1595498857; bh=i93kHKeOyMfXW1fYEwsN1TpVCik+beIS/Sob5EqMNJY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=SuYzYjaRb+8gVsT2fwcJEAmvpla4U/YHm04K7dWZKjTpxv2aiCN+IErqo/6HuSujE bbQd6d16y+2dE0um/1757Tj9JXZGahv4RA/KnYo8fwvc2Xu2WXkgGuAqb/7qNs0XLK IM/YJMe1qQKwGm0Uzi1GXqvUjZBE9viTt48VxJWQ=
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20200722172939.891DE1D620A4@ary.qy> <30737.1595442784@localhost> <b4fbf37b-4db7-ae9f-6b6-be5618fdfa8c@taugh.com>
From: Steve Atkins <steve@wordtothewise.com>
Message-ID: <7f22a23f-6cda-8be6-fcef-ad11b138d6fa@wordtothewise.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:07:35 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b4fbf37b-4db7-ae9f-6b6-be5618fdfa8c@taugh.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/IH8_p-wNC9bUtIzckgy3QIz4lsw>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] broken signatures, was Curious
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:07:40 -0000

On 22/07/2020 19:55, John R Levine wrote:
>>    > That's not gpod advice. The point of the mystery headers is to tell
>>    > what happened to the message during its trip, and the part of 
>> the trip
>>    > before it hit the list manager is as important as the part 
>> after. When
>>    > I'm trying to figure out why something undesirable leaked 
>> through the
>>    > list manager, I need the original headers to figure out what 
>> happened.
>>
>> Right. You need the standard "Received:" lines, which would be a known
>> header at this point, so it would remain.
>
> Really, I find the other stuff to be useful.  I understand that you 
> don't, but you're not the only one here.

Autoresponders and list managers that snip out headers they don't 
understand, particularly those that were added as part of a 
belt-and-braces attempt to avoid mail loops and message amplification, 
can cause problems.

Those not-described-by-RFC headers - e.g. "X-BeenThere: 
ietf-smtp@ietf.org" - are not just useful for manual diagnostics, but 
also for automated mitigation of operational problems.

Cheers,
   Steve