On 2021-02-04 15:54, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
Dnia 4.02.2021 o godz. 15:44:20 Jeff Abrahamson pisze:
0.1 DKIM_INVALID DKIM or DK signature exists, but is
not
valid
Is this normal or a point for worry? It did say "not spam".
I have noticed that it is common for SpamAssassin to say DKIM_INVALID
for
perfectly correctly DKIM signed messages. I don't know why it is so,
but I
see it in SA results all the time.
what software say its valid ?
your dkim signature is
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=rafa.eu.org;
s=mail;
t=1612450476; bh=O8f2wrKHnjqIgNmKbiWnvjxMilxPoIgUDSQZFCVc/gk=;
h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
b=VLK6DlBhoqbsF8IFRGbcBcQaoDgLCA2LOYLFY7WMIvJELfZ8i8TWw9gTJNivpTonK
NmxugAwZyd/2Olrn4kD2US6UQyUdtSdI5i3ndnJ15bmHis1NXvrBDFXcpF344gspvA
8KhmrJtuj9JJQGw5Q6+FbeNmm6NJo0kK9pq1BBqU=
to get not invalid try change c=, simple is more strong then relaxed
it worked for sdlu maillists, i was blamed that spamassing says invalid
for this maillist
i admit i dont know if this is really the right fix or not, but it did
solve sdlu maillist
could it be that dkim singner recives 8bitmime data and signs it, where
remote changes it to not be 8bitmime on nexthop, i remember amavisd
setup says amavisd should disable 8bitmime if dkim signing in amavisd
As I totally do not care about DKIM and it is by no way a spam mark to
me, I
had no motivation to investigate it any further. Maybe someone knows
more...
in that case we a in same boat
