Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic]
"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 11 September 2014 01:25 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BAA21A013B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 18:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.062
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.062 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, MANGLED_SPAM=2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 fHgI-4iuc4Jp for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 18:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EDCC1A0123 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 18:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 70881 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2014 01:25:44 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 11 Sep 2014 01:25:44 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fef.5410fa1a.k1409; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=LBypzCMoKCntaVlpNdU9XpIcjG7SYKTjdwr661QjgkE=; b=ZzrSuMoLhf9ioTvQYefNQ92jFyX31n+srHvQZLLBlTznK6KAlEGrShLDCcET4ngxYeT4Ip9AFWxW2By8oxirRpYd0QtlLqp1fwitzAcMk5TN9iN180OaqwaPHoEp/9S3vd9G2O59ADBy/0TfG89p6UWMiot3gd09mJEdO2P3AxJsvLQmK51bZ5PLEdISUypTt0XXDk5vFzXb2mCJbfYEUoTF2jpHB4UfPARVrcmeiOHLH1rGT2M8ljE0DYkVy/uq
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fef.5410fa1a.k1409; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=LBypzCMoKCntaVlpNdU9XpIcjG7SYKTjdwr661QjgkE=; b=mtdNHaExbF7yeBsZ1ViNCEnZRIjlVqmpuD0HtcdlivMGO3OFOiwGHfjLiYeieTIdQDLSfovtWZh/g1Pg8XiEwxcLZKSaws0D4MopWZzrydOmAc1WVhHL1I9r1Tbv9flAhKzBJclY5+8tzW1YA4hEQzffZrxGLcTVdIHK+uMo7g6wfahvj6ZS71TAN6Srg0NNQDPQAGbs6KpH4KwkyXdo5S4m+Zqp2iTp0NIWXG2QEnFv5wjm7EhH/uM3kn5dQVFf
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 01:25:24 -0000
Message-ID: <20140911012524.4078.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic]
In-Reply-To: <54107679.8080006@dougbarton.us>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/K2uBckDjS35aiah1j6JY9bSFQ-A
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 01:25:47 -0000
>Is there an update on this? Aside from the operational importance of >having the IETF mailing lists working well for all users, knowledge of >how well the latest mailman fixes work will be very helpful for this >community to have. There's a bunch of different workarounds in the latest version of Mailman. The one that's most widely used rewrites the From: line to put the list's address in place of the author's. It "works" in the sense that it avoids DMARC rejections, but at the cost of screwing up the mailing lists so you can't tell who wrote what from the usual MUA display, and in many cases, you can't tell who wrote a message at all unless you put the author's address as the Reply-To, which has its own well known set of problems. I've collected all of the DMARC workarounds I know on the ASRG wiki: http://wiki.asrg.sp.am/wiki/Mitigating_DMARC_damage_to_third_party_mail On my lists, I rewrite the domain in the From: line to create forwarding addresses for the real authors. It's a crock, but one I find preserves the mailing list functionality better. R's, John
- gmail users read on... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... Rich Kulawiec
- Re: gmail users read on... Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Michael Richardson
- Re: gmail users read on... Mary Barnes
- RE: gmail users read on... l.wood
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... Tim Bray
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: gmail users read on... Paul Hoffman
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... joel jaeggli
- Re: gmail users read on... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: gmail users read on... [technical subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Hector Santos
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Antonio Prado
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Joe Abley
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Christian Huitema
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Miles Fidelman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Donald Eastlake
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Viktor Dukhovni
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: gmail users read on... Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Scott Kitterman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: gmail users read on... George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… David Morris
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec