Murray S. Kucherawy wrote on 2023-07-24 00:10:
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 1:06 PM Matthäus Wander
<mail=40wander.scie...@dmarc.ietf.org
<mailto:40wander.scie...@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
b) Messages are generated by an automated system without a Date header
and signed by a central MTA. An outgoing mail gateway then adds the
missing Date header (Postfix option 'always_add_missing_headers'), thus
invalidating the DKIM signature.
Why is the signer claiming to sign a header field ("Date", in this case)
that isn't there? This seems like a bug.
The signer uses a fixed set of header fields to sign, which usually
exist or should be oversigned if nonexistent (one size fits most). The
signer is not tailored towards this specific mail source. But yes, it's
a bug in the system.
Regards,
Matt
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
