At 11:51 13-06-2009, Charles Lindsey wrote:
But there will be a few lists where this is not the case, such as the one
SM mentions. I don't know whether the spam on that particular list is
because the list admin is careless, or whether it is inherent in the
subject matter of the list. EIther way, it is necessary for recipients to
be watchful.
There's more than one list admin. The subject matter is
technical. The issue is not whether the list admin is
careless. There are a lot of mailing lists administered by part time
administrators. If we start playing the blame game, it will work against DKIM.
Maybe their standard spam filters will filter out the spam (though I doubt
it). So they may well want to take note of any signature placed there by
the original sender. It is in the nature of that sort of list that the
list admin can only sign to say that it came from his list, But if he is
smart, he can help his members by checking and reporting on any in coming
signatures he receives (e.g. by inserting A-R headers, and not destroying
original signatures). That way, the ultimate recipients can be reassured
even if the policy of the list is (for some good reason, let us assume) to
forward everything submitted to it.
I don't have any solution to suggest. DKIM is in its infancy and
there's still a lot of work to be done. My message was not meant as
input about whether A-R headers or other headers are to be removed or
not. I prefer to see how the information is being used first.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html