Greg Stark <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think that would put us in a situation where DKIM signatures would still
>> pass, at least unless the source insisted on signing Sender: too.

> Incidentally I'm confused about your concern about Sender. Sender has
> almost no significance for email afaik.

The PG lists do not think so; for example in -hackers traffic you will
find

Sender: [email protected]

which matches the envelope From address.  Every other mailing list I'm on
behaves similarly.  Now, I'm not an email standards guru so I have no idea
whether that's actually necessary or not, but I kinda doubt that you're
right and all the mailing list software authors are wrong.

                        regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to