Closed dilyanpalauzov closed 5 years ago
As I recall, the index 1 is used because we don't want to precede the Received field that the MTA will add. Is the current implementation causing problems?
I filed this case after seeing in my mails, that the AR-header was not at the place where I expected it. Afterwards I found, that my MDA reorders the headers, as it handles Received as trace headers, but not Authentication-Results headers and the used index does not really matter. So I am not sure today where index 1 inserts the headers.
If you verify, that index 0 inserts Authentication-Results: before Received:, then you can close this case.
From the milter documentation:
"Setting hdridx to 0 will actually insert the header before this Received: header."
Prepending DKIM headers in front of Received: headers helps software like SpamAssassin to trust those headers. Headers below Received: can be added by sending client, while headers above it can not.
I have verified that changing argument 2 of dkimf_insheader does put Authentication-Results header above Recveived: which is a good thing.
We're concentrating on OpenDKIM this cycle -- if you have experimented and found a patch/change that helps, please checkout the github, and then submit a PR/patch to the "develop" branch for us to merge in.
Sincerely, Martin Bogomolni Maintainer : Trusted Domain Project
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:50 AM fanto666 @.***> wrote:
Prepending DKIM headers in front of Received: headers helps software like SpamAssassin to trust those headers. Headers below Received: can be added by sending client, while headers above it can not.
I have verified that changing argument 2 of dkimf_insheader does put Authentication-Results header above Recveived: which is a good thing.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/trusteddomainproject/OpenDKIM/issues/24#issuecomment-843840900, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAB5KKIUFRZFO3LUPLVDQD3TONUSRANCNFSM4FC67IEQ .
@fanto666 I’m interested in this, too. Will you create the pull request? And we need the same in OpenDMARC.
Hi guys, I'm happy to provide patch at: http://test.fantomas.sk/opendkim.c.patch hoping that will help you
as these are trace headers: