Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 21/07/2014 05:09, Miles Fidelman wrote:
...
Leaving aside the question of whether or not IETF should use a
workaround, I thought there was a mailman patch to deal with re-writing
from addresses for DMARC p=reject.
No, it isn't selective for addresses from a domain with a p=reject policy.
It's clearly unacceptable to rewrite addresses that don't need to be
rewritten.
Seems to be now. From the Mailman site:
Implemented now for release in 2.1.18 are the following:
* The from_is_list feature from 2.1.16 is always available.
* There are new settings in Privacy options - Sender filters:
o dmarc_moderaction_action is a five valued setting with values
+ Accept - accept the post without rewriting From: or wrapping
the message
+ Munge From - rewrite the From: and Reply-To: as in from_is_list
+ Wrap Message - wrap the message as in from_is_list
+ Reject - reject the post
+ Discard - Discard the post
o dmarc_moderaction_notice is a custom reject message to replace
the default Reject message.
* The above options other than Accept override thefrom_is_list setting
for messages whose original From: domain publishes a DMARC policy of
p=reject or p=quarantine. A per-list option is available to limit
this to just p=reject or to apply it to either p=reject or
p=quarantine. If the option is Accept, the from_is_list setting applies.
* There is a site option to set the default for
dmarc_moderaction_action and list admins may not set the action to a
setting which is above the site default in the above list. E.g., if
the site default is Reject, list admins can only set Reject or
Discard; if the site default is Munge From, list admins can select
anything but Accept.
Miles
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra