On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Henrik Schack <henrik.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >it's nice to see how many respondents in this thread gave all sorts of >> advise to Henrik how to deal with a problem, which basically cannot solved >> by him because it is caused by some 3rd party (modifying the body of a mail >> for adv. purposes). >> > >> >I interpreted Henrik's mail as a followup to the thread that John Kelly >> started, titled 'Indirect mail flows'. In my view both John and Henrik >> tried to make (a start of) an inventory of all sorts of real-life >> situations that potentially can break DKIM signatures or more in general: >> cause DMARC failures for legitimate mail flows where sending DMARC >policy >> is p=reject. > > IMO, DMARC and the policy assertions made thereby is entirely beside the point here - does nobody care that mail authentication signatures (DKIM in other words) is being willfully damaged by clueless vendors? Invalid DKIM signatures may not be a "negative" reputation factor, but they certainly aren't a positive one either. . ."would all interested volunteers please step forward" :-) --Kurt
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
