On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 00:20:54 +0200
Steffen Nurpmeso (steffen=sdaoden.eu) via suckless dev list
<dev_at_suckless.org> wrote:
Dear Steffen,
thank you for your input!
> Steffen Nurpmeso steffen=sdaoden.eu via suckless dev list wrote in
> <20260918220423.g7VBVKfj_at_steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
> |Laslo Hunhold dev=frign.de via suckless dev list wrote in
> | <20260918232201.0d5adcd9_at_frign.de>:
> |
> |DKIM should cover MIME fields, see 2017/8
> |
> |
> https://noxxi.de/research/breaking-dkim-on-purpose-and-by-chance.html
> | |Not saying more.
>
> Wait. Author: should not be overwritten when it already exists (i
> set it, i think certain Thunderbird devs mentioned on some IETF
> list they started supporting it, or so), says 9057:
>
> Processing of the Author: field follows these rules:
>
> * If an Author: field already exists, a new one MUST NOT be
> created, and the existing one MUST NOT be modified.
>
> Whereas you simply create a second one.
From-munging is a pretty standard approach and deployed by the IETF
itself on their mailing lists. It's not a new idea I proposed.
> I myself find
>
> via suckless dev list <dev_at_suckless.org>
>
> excessive, given that
>
> via <dev_at_suckless.org>
>
> is shorter and more to the point.
>
> I very much like that "Laslo Hunhold (dev=frign.de)" thing, but am
> a bit afraid that many MUAs will simply remove the comment; granted
> creating a correct quoted-string is not easy, but placing all in
> one may be a thing.
Many MUAs remove anything in the angle brackets, including mine.
Anything before the '<' is the 'name' of the sender, which should be
displayed normally. For this reason it looks excessive if you look at
the full block, but with out it, it would look strange. We need the
explicit address within '<>'.
As another note, mlmmj added mainline support for this munging
approach. It's not the nicest, but it's necessary.
With best regards
Laslo
[0]:
https://www.ietf.org/participate/tools/dmarc/
Received on Sat Sep 19 2026 - 00:30:06 CEST