Charles Lindsey wrote:
[big snip describing use of Magic s/w]
And then you have sufficient
information to decide whether it had failed because your Magic software
was inadequate, or because it was a bogus signature from a spammer.
Q.E.D.
Not quite. Whatever policy anyone publishes is public. Any spammer
can always replicate everything correctly with the exception of
the signature bits and thus create a message that appears to adhere
to policy but with a broken signature.
Seems to me that that's a *very* good reason to ignore the entire
FAILed signature and not to use any supposedly Magic s/w.
What have I missed?
Stephen.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html