Hello,
someone from amazon Germany may be interested.
Again: I guess it's a legit message from amazon, otherwise let me know ...
Authentication-Results: idvmailin13.datevnet.de;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=amazonses.com
header.i=@amazonses.com header.b=IGahw/4Y
Authentica
In article <20150616080608.horde.np0fbkrfk-jumt5krom4...@andreasschulze.de> you
write:
>someone from amazon Germany may be interested.
>Again: I guess it's a legit message from amazon, otherwise let me know ...
It looks fine. How does your code pass the DKIM validation results to the
DMARC code
Hello John,
John Levine via dmarc-discuss:
It looks fine.
in which sense?
- RFC5322.From is "amazon.DE"
- SPF pass for "bounces.amazon.COM"
- DKIM pass for "amazonses.COM"
so neither SPF nor DKIM is aligned. according to the published record
the message should be quarantined:
$ opendmarc-
In one version you also havedkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected)
header.d=amazon.de
header.i=@marketplace.amazon.de header.b=AOE4Rr31
which is an aligned pass because marketplace.amazon.de inherits amazon.de's
record which doesn't specify strictness of alignment and therefore defaults to
rela
>Would be good to hear from Murray if this is the intended use-case for
>OpenDMARC. In general I know OpenDMARC simply as an A-R header parser.
>So my assumptions could not be completely wrong...
I call the libraries directly, so in my implementation nothing parses A-R
headers at all.
R's,
John
Am 16.06.2015 um 20:22 schrieb Elizabeth Zwicky via dmarc-discuss:
In one version you also have
dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=amazon.de
header.i=@marketplace.amazon.de header.b=AOE4Rr31
which is an aligned pass because marketplace.amazon.de inherits
amazon.de's record which do
A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss:
someone from amazon Germany may be interested.
Again: I guess it's a legit message from amazon, otherwise let me know ...
further investigations made the picture more clear:
Most messages in question usually have two dkim signatures
(amazonses.com+amazon.de)
wh
On 6/16/15, 10:02 AM, "A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss"
wrote:
>Oh, never thought about that. I know that scheme (separate A-R header)
>since years. You're right. they may be combined to only one A-R.
>But the way I use it they insert multiple A-R header.
>
>Would be good to hear from Murray if this
On 6/16/15, 11:39 AM, "A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss"
wrote:
>It's a little bit confusing. I have two unrelated issues.
>The one mentioned above looks like a bug in OpenDMARC.
>But that's unconfirmed by Murray...
If you have evidence of a bug, please put it in a ticket on SourceForge.
I don¹t che
