Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle

2014-04-28 Thread Charlie Brady
On Sun, 27 Apr 2014, Matt Simerson wrote: > > and are dealing with the fallout. > > I dealt with the "fallout" on my mailing lists in May of 2013: > > http://matt.simerson.net/news/2013/05/01/dkim-and-mailing-lists Your "fix": > cd path/to/ezmlm/list; rm prefix text/trailer addtrailer

Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle

2014-04-28 Thread Charlie Brady
On Sun, 27 Apr 2014, Matt Simerson wrote: > If you're operating a mailing list, you have 3 choices: > >1. Don't break DKIM >2. If you insist upon breaking DKIM by adding subject prefixes and message > trailers, take ownership of the message by changing the From address to your > own do

Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle (fwd)

2014-04-28 Thread Charlie Brady
I'm guessing that Matt didn't intend this information to be private to me. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:45:55 -0700 From: Matt Simerson To: Charlie Brady Subject: Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle On Apr 28, 2014, at 6:13 AM, Charlie Brady wrote: > On Sun, 27 A

Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle

2014-04-28 Thread Charlie Brady
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Matt Simerson wrote: > > So either DKIM isn't relevant, or something else in my > > qpsmtpd/qmail/ezmlm-idx chain is breaking DKIM. Any suggestions? > > If ezmlm isn't adding a list prefix or message trailers, then it's > unlikely that ezmlm is breaking the messages DKIM s

Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle (fwd)

2014-04-28 Thread Charlie Brady
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Matt Simerson wrote: > On Apr 28, 2014, at 10:57 AM, Charlie Brady > wrote: > > > I'm guessing that Matt didn't intend this information to be private to me. > > Correct, but perl.org is rejecting all messages from domains with DMARC > p=reject policies, which includes mi

Re: Yahoo's DMARC debacle (fwd)

2014-04-28 Thread Robert Spier
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Charlie Brady < charlieb-qpsm...@budge.apana.org.au> wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Matt Simerson wrote: > > > On Apr 28, 2014, at 10:57 AM, Charlie Brady < > charlieb-qpsm...@budge.apana.org.au> wrote: > > > > > I'm guessing that Matt didn't intend this informat