OT: DKIM signatures on email messages from lists.gnupg.org

Steffen Nurpmeso steffen at sdaoden.eu
Tue Jun 13 16:43:00 CEST 2023

Alexander Leidinger wrote in
 <20230613091839.Horde.xOmd2-klk1PTncda-lgsFUI at webmail.leidinger.net>:
 |Quoting Steffen Nurpmeso <steffen at sdaoden.eu> (from Mon, 12 Jun 2023  
 |21:54:45 +0200):
 |> non-deleted things from there (also automatically).  I am happy
 |> that many lists i am on continue to use that subject tagging, or
 |> reintroduced it, because i get a human-compatible overview with
 |> a single glance (already thread-sorted) when i look into my INBOX.
 |> This includes IETF lists, tuhs and coff, 9fans, oss-sec and many
 |> more.
 |> (Having said that lists i read like those from NetBSD never did
 |> anything such, and did not need to change anything to work in
 |> today's email world.)
 |As you are also on the FreeBSD mailinglists:
 |We had footers in there in the past (a quick check of messages from  
 |1999 and 2006 confirms this). In 2021 (around June/July it seems) we  
 |changed that, at least partly due to DKIM signatures failing (not sure  
 |if this was the only reason).
 |I do not remember any complains from users about this change (I'm not  
 |part of the FreeBSD postmaster team, but I had a discussion about  
 |failing DKIM signatures with them, and we get internal status reports  
 |from them from time to time). We never had subject munging in place.
 |With more than 100 public lists FreeBSD uses, and a lot of subscribers  
 |per list, I would say generally we can live without mail-munging by  
 |mailinglists. Those people which want to keep it the old way, are  

Yeah that is your own biased opinion, but i am happy that i am on
MLs which do otherwise.

 |typically old and experienced enough (procmail/formail anyone?) to do  
 |their own mail-munging based upon existing header lines.

You surely miss the one from the tmux developer which i never used
but would claim is surely a good one.

But it is not that simple, @FreeBSD.org developer email addresses
are often aliases to for example @gmail.com, and until at least
once i last had comm with one mails were simply retransmitted,
i had to weaken my SPF record from -all to ~all because that
failed.  (I included postsrsd in the list due to this.)

 |I also consider things like DKIM much more useful than a footer or  
 |other mail-munging.

But where is the connection with this.
It is not DKIM that kills mailing-lists, no?
Sure DKIM is something useful, unfortunately its further
development is blocked by some destroyers on the according IETF
list, it even switched to moderated mode due to that, very, _very_
ugly.  Then again i personally think DKIM and all the other things
are only plastering over a false solution, but yes, they do that.
And with PGP you can even have non-MIME confidentiality and/or
assurance (easily).  Even those who work on email for over fourty
years are having long notation threads over whether a ML sent mail
is "new", or whatever and all that .. is surely off-topic.

|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)
|..and in spring, hear David Leonard sing..
|The black bear,          The black bear,
|blithely holds his own   holds himself at leisure
|beating it, up and down  tossing over his ups and downs with pleasure
|Farewell, dear collar bear

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list