Message ID | 20190506143301.GU14916@sirena.org.uk (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | [GIT,PULL] spi updates for v5.2 | expand |
Mark, gmail once again hates your emails. Your email ends up as spam, due to dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org but it has a DKIM signature for sirena.org.uk: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sirena.org.uk; ... Hmm? Linus
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 12:01:44PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Mark, > gmail once again hates your emails. Your email ends up as spam, due to > > dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org That looks like it's a fail on validation of the kernel.org bit of things which I have no control over and which purposely doesn't advertise DKIM stuff in the hope that people will actually be able to send mail from non-kernel.org mail servers. I'm really unsure why that's failing at all, there's no policy for kernel.org to fail. > but it has a DKIM signature for sirena.org.uk: > > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; > d=sirena.org.uk; ... which should match the envelope sender. As far as I can tell Google is going to be unhappy no matter what unless I use their services - if there's DKIM records it's not going to like that the from is from kernel.org and if I don't have DKIM records then it's not going to like that either and I'll be more vulnerable to the blacklists that try to extort money out of people for permanent delisting. Possibly it's not actually anything to do with the DKIM and it's just upset that I'm travelling and so the mail was injected from a mobile broadband IP in Japan which doesn't match up with the .uk domain.
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:19 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org > > That looks like it's a fail on validation of the kernel.org bit of > things which I have no control over and which purposely doesn't > advertise DKIM stuff in the hope that people will actually be able to > send mail from non-kernel.org mail servers. Looking around, I think you're right, and it's probably not actually the DKIM thing that causes problems. Because yes, kernel.org dmarc will just say "ignore". So I think it's just google that still doesn't like sirena.org.uk. Iirc, that's happened before, no? Linus
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 11:18:53AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > Possibly it's not actually anything to do with the DKIM and it's just > upset that I'm travelling and so the mail was injected from a mobile > broadband IP in Japan which doesn't match up with the .uk domain. I've tried sending equivalent mail to one of my own Google accounts and it gets delivered, though I do see the dmarc=fail bit in the headers. The full header there is for a newer spec called ARC that builds even more stuff on top of DKIM and SPF. ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@sirena.org.uk header.s=20170815-heliosphere header.b=gYHUGKmm; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of broonie@sirena.org.uk designates 2a01:7e01::f03c:91ff:fed4:a3b6 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=broonie@sirena.org.uk; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org which suggests it's adding some guesswork in there on top of what's explicitly in there for SPF (though that's not causing trouble as it worked out that the mail is OK). The fact that this got through OK and all the NONEs there suggest that they are to at least some extent doing the right thing with the lack of any advertised policies for kernel.org, either something else about the message or your incoming mail is causing the spam filtering. Unfortunately I can't immediately see any exim stuff for ARC (and I don't know that there's anything there that could really help) and I can't do DKIM for kernel.org (for good reasons), the only thing I can think of is to disable signing of the From: and hope Google just stop trying to validate it but that doesn't seem ideal. Everything I'm seeing is saying that Google just isn't enthusiastic about domains like kernel.org which is going an issue. Not really sure what I can do here...
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 07:34:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So I think it's just google that still doesn't like sirena.org.uk. > Iirc, that's happened before, no? In the past that always looked like it was triggered by some of the blacklists that basically seem to have a business model that involves at least partly charging people money for whitelisting and so are perhaps a little trigger happy when it comes to listing servers. This time around I'm not seeing any signs of that happening but I might've missed some, I don't know if Google stopped using those blacklists or something.
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 8:02 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > Everything I'm > seeing is saying that Google just isn't enthusiastic about domains like > kernel.org which is going an issue. Well, there are other people who use kernel.org email addresses. Ingo Molnar, Rafael Wysocki, a couple of others. But you're the one getting marked as spam. Somebody just hates you. I do end up checking my spam-box regularly, so maybe it doesn't matter. Linus
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 08:13:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 8:02 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > Everything I'm > > seeing is saying that Google just isn't enthusiastic about domains like > > kernel.org which is going an issue. > Well, there are other people who use kernel.org email addresses. Ingo > Molnar, Rafael Wysocki, a couple of others. But you're the one > getting marked as spam. I'm not going to search for rule 36 SPI. > Somebody just hates you. I do end up checking my spam-box regularly, > so maybe it doesn't matter. Some spot checks are suggesting that they use gmail as their outbound relay which I can imagine they'd like but would break some stuff for me for non-kernel.org mail I think, it'd be a major rework to not inject stuff via sendmail.
Hi, On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 08:03:45PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 08:13:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 8:02 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > Everything I'm > > > seeing is saying that Google just isn't enthusiastic about domains like > > > kernel.org which is going an issue. > > > Well, there are other people who use kernel.org email addresses. Ingo > > Molnar, Rafael Wysocki, a couple of others. But you're the one > > getting marked as spam. > > I'm not going to search for rule 36 SPI. > > > Somebody just hates you. I do end up checking my spam-box regularly, > > so maybe it doesn't matter. > > Some spot checks are suggesting that they use gmail as their outbound > relay which I can imagine they'd like but would break some stuff for me > for non-kernel.org mail I think, it'd be a major rework to not inject > stuff via sendmail. FWIW, I send out kernel.org mails via mail.kernel.org. Konstantin added that service in 2014. You can get a password with ssh git@gitolite.kernel.org getsmtppass and then use the following settings for (example for git): [sendemail] smtpserver = mail.kernel.org smtpserverport = 587 smtpencryption = tls smtpuser = <user>@kernel.org smtppass = [randomstring] -- Sebastian
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:33 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > spi: Updates for v5.2 Hmm. Please be more careful. Commit 1dfbf334f123 ("spi: ep93xx: Convert to use CS GPIO descriptors") caused a new warning because it removed a "for ()" loop, but left the now unused variable 'i' around. I fixed it up in the merge, because I hate warnings that may hide real problems. But I also expect maintainers to check their warnings, exactly because the normal build is supposed to have none. So a new warning does stand out. Linus
The pull request you sent on Mon, 6 May 2019 23:33:01 +0900:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git tags/spi-v5.2
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/9bff9dfc513bd5de72cb59f4bffb72cf0a5aa526
Thank you!
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:07:30PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > FWIW, I send out kernel.org mails via mail.kernel.org. Konstantin > added that service in 2014. You can get a password with > ssh git@gitolite.kernel.org getsmtppass > > and then use the following settings for (example for git): I'd have to send all mail out via kernel.org to do that, or persuade a MTA to route mail differently based on contents which seems interesting - I inject most of my mail via /usr/sbin/sendmail rather than SMTP (including a bunch of scripts).
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 08:08:50AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 7:33 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > spi: Updates for v5.2 > Hmm. Please be more careful. Commit 1dfbf334f123 ("spi: ep93xx: > Convert to use CS GPIO descriptors") caused a new warning because it > removed a "for ()" loop, but left the now unused variable 'i' around. > I fixed it up in the merge, because I hate warnings that may hide real > problems. But I also expect maintainers to check their warnings, > exactly because the normal build is supposed to have none. So a new > warning does stand out. Sorry, I've actually got a fix for that queued but obviously didn't manage to make sure it made it all the way through the process to the pull request.
Hi, On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 03:09:36PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:07:30PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > FWIW, I send out kernel.org mails via mail.kernel.org. Konstantin > > added that service in 2014. You can get a password with > > > ssh git@gitolite.kernel.org getsmtppass > > > > and then use the following settings for (example for git): > > I'd have to send all mail out via kernel.org to do that, or persuade a > MTA to route mail differently based on contents which seems interesting > - I inject most of my mail via /usr/sbin/sendmail rather than SMTP > (including a bunch of scripts). I have a locally installed postfix in sender dependent relay configuration, which does that for me: http://www.postfix.org/SOHO_README.html#client_sasl_sender -- Sebastian
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 03:09:36PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:07:30PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > > FWIW, I send out kernel.org mails via mail.kernel.org. Konstantin > > added that service in 2014. You can get a password with > > > ssh git@gitolite.kernel.org getsmtppass > > > > and then use the following settings for (example for git): > > I'd have to send all mail out via kernel.org to do that, or persuade a > MTA to route mail differently based on contents which seems interesting > - I inject most of my mail via /usr/sbin/sendmail rather than SMTP > (including a bunch of scripts). I use a program called msmtp (https://marlam.de/msmtp/) to route email to different SMTP servers based on my sender address. Once you have your accounts configured, replace the call to the sendmail binary in your MUA with msmtp and it'll route the email differently for you. It's included in the package repositories for most major Linux distributions. Here's two resources I found that show how to configure mutt and git send-email to use msmtp: https://hostpresto.com/community/tutorials/how-to-send-email-from-the-command-line-with-msmtp-and-mutt/ https://jordonwu.github.io/blog/2015/12/01/git-send-email-and-msmtp-config/ Once you have msmtp setup, send test emails from each of your accounts to check-auth@verifier.port25.com to have a bot verify that your email is setup properly (DKIM, SPF, reverse DNS, etc). Brian
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 12:13:01PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 03:09:36PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > > I'd have to send all mail out via kernel.org to do that, or persuade a > > MTA to route mail differently based on contents which seems interesting > > - I inject most of my mail via /usr/sbin/sendmail rather than SMTP > > (including a bunch of scripts). > I have a locally installed postfix in sender dependent relay > configuration, which does that for me: > http://www.postfix.org/SOHO_README.html#client_sasl_sender I'm using exim on the central relay box which is much more painful to configure than postfix sadly (one of these days I'll get round to converting to Postfix since I prefer it and already use it on my client boxes but the DKIM stuff is painful enough and there's enough stuff using the box that it'll require me to actually sit down properly to do something as substantial as cutting over MTAs). It's also not clear to me that Postfix can be configured based on From rather than envelope sender, I have used the configuration options you're pointing at for envelope senders before but at least at that time Postfix didn't support setting envelope sender via /usr/sbin/sendmail.