Need more checks on diffrent providers - HELP

dkim

(Zimny) #1


We check it already against wit Apple, Google and MS
Can yo do it againts your email providers so we can know how this this bug can affect you?
Anyone have accounts in different email provides?
If you are using dmarc for your domain or work with strict customers (government stuff mostly) can you provide feedback. This is about new email2 module in NS. Definitely better from Spam Assassin but we need feedback how this implicate the global network.
All comments appreciated.


(Uwe) #2

Zimny,

what exactly do you want to know? I tested it with MS and with Strato. The sent mails arrive and dont end in spam.

Regards

Uwe


(Zimny) #3

Sorry my mistake.
We are dealing with dmarc here DKIM+disclaimer problems after upgrade to mail2 module


(Stéphane de Labrusse) #4

Sorry, but dmarc is another level of policy, we are here talking about DKIM which is not compliant because we alter the body with a disclaimer


(Zimny) #5

dmarc is a policy. If we are thinking about NS distro like for not only home users then this need be sort it any point.
Just my thoughts


(Stéphane de Labrusse) #6

https://wiki.nethserver.org/doku.php?id=email_protection_resources

feel free to add or amend the documentation I did

dmarc is a level of protection based on dkim, where you say what to do with an email when dkim is not verifiable or bad.

Here our issue is dkim.

please correct me if I am wrong


(Zimny) #7

Don’t think so the dkim is a problem. The problem is disclaimer implementation in NS. What do you mean that dmarc is protocol not policy Stéphane???
All of dmarc/spf/dkim is just idea for security reasons. This is just records,etc. This is not a protocol.


(Stéphane de Labrusse) #8

Yep if you prefer policy, a mandatory policy if you want to send your email alone…I am quite sure that a lot of people here use a smarthost to send their email. So they are not concerned by this issue.

I repeat for me the issue is dkim, disclaimer is well added, but dkim is broken by the disclaimer


(Zimny) #9

Agree that smart host users don’t complain. But is NS distro for home users? Because if so then you need include desktop also I believe.
dkim,spf,dmarc is a policy.
NS disclaimer implementation is not compatible with dkim.
I think we are loosing each other in translations of “protocol”.
For me protocol can be like TCP or UDP and also “company protocol to follow”.
Is this our misunderstanding?