[ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary)
chl at clerew.man.ac.uk
Wed Jun 17 03:00:05 PDT 2009
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:05:33 +0100, SM <sm at resistor.net> wrote:
>> -7. His signature did NOT cover the A-R he had added (so we have to
>> that it was not an artefact by the spammer, although it most certainly
>> SHOULD have been removed if it was). So we may well "believe" the list
>> manager had put it there, but it would be nicer to have had some proof.
> At a guess, I'd say that the list manager did not put that header there.
As a matter of interest, could you say why?
AFAICS, this spam actually came from a sleeping member of this list who
was trying to drum up friends on Facebook, and inadvertently sent it to
everyone in his address book, including this list (observe the 'whitelist'
remarks in the X-Greylist header). Indeed, he subsequently apologised on
this list for his error, and the headers on his apology are exactly
analagous to those on the spam.
Moreover, if this A-R header HAD been present in the original, it SHOULD
have been removed by the list manager, according to RFC 5451.
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
More information about the ietf-dkim