From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail-ed1-f48.google.com ([209.85.208.48]) by ewsd; Mon Sep 21 13:58:27 EDT 2020
Received: by mail-ed1-f48.google.com with SMTP id n13so13641868edo.10
        for <9front@9front.org>; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 10:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
        bh=q7Hn3Iv1MAtn9EIwdJBdw13CRDQyEmcSpJVFsCJA0ak=;
        b=bjX9DHGjQhOIUzGC8pFqt77CI+WrAU8/QTx0uRQr4BbJGeclatHyTJxiNhWBtPWS0R
         HT5bmk3bG5dkFSgO75OUNxM7gusgiaAOySkYC2HwmvbEKN3aKuh1v9HT3NRSqTShiSvo
         k6NThd4Zo8DunWCqems9CB95uV0HxkTjK8VT/7nL6s1Zn8os95I8F8nyMCXRswYHJdt4
         DD7GBZlmPledb2CIz6UznLJIpY//KsxIMQdpeJhTSDknTHhRrJuoqbqEAMWmppyBBGIE
         QW/lbdkjAe2HVLcdaaeOA0brXpyG7NEFGIAVPhB+EOxcdZoPoiYurb1dL5n5qnw9ThB3
         VybA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
         :message-id:subject:to;
        bh=q7Hn3Iv1MAtn9EIwdJBdw13CRDQyEmcSpJVFsCJA0ak=;
        b=UMWpL8CuE3qcsRHrh4wW8WkXesqXrMcpVqVN6imEBHsPPDVRA+0pm4iSMZ6BqK9L46
         U2hhOzuCDiw+x2r7epQXRZWepiQicd3UsQVEvDQkaEURxBiS5ukMU6rrHJQUkMNAp4Pa
         7ezZmzL3sM5iIulrSQC5itAXwN+Lt50B4vSP87lsTKW6kqzNFCeQ+412GgMdpLYXSb9G
         IyVvqsLyzI+U4R75z4Dak6TmH28GBeYHlxRLBunt1y9tMQBBtovpzt4mUf+TMklKdiE0
         p4PodmrJZS3pRwatneLiLvqKhVErVjjMXDzhU4M3W3h93A0erig2lmn6Sj+ge7rBXGFF
         iU3A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532DAzvKtvCsA8caloRBzylb6DnXNhTv40k6ykLQamV7X6UbunQF
	yDeXMsxJ21JcxjT3k+Zl2iQ8GPlldBmlzJNS/wWPwEHV
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx2wJbFa3Ty2hO9nW7ldPLx8oZTXq2ZYVXOjvqX0LaWAeEF4NoHndvCvAkSBM+opTI+yMC6lPbAgMqEHeyq46A=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1451:: with SMTP id d17mr138435edx.48.1600711097811;
 Mon, 21 Sep 2020 10:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a17:906:29c2:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Sep 2020 10:58:17
 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5F0A6AD0-ECFA-4383-B0F6-4C3EB0508B1B@stanleylieber.com>
References: <8470F460DE71A2A9B26BF9B46F894E4F@eigenstate.org> <5F0A6AD0-ECFA-4383-B0F6-4C3EB0508B1B@stanleylieber.com>
From: hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:58:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFSF3XP7s2+8vvZuQhe_TOsk1UkmrUAcdA0vRsb7_aqLoR0u5w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [9front] test
To: 9front@9front.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: out-scaling event hardware 

option 1 and 3 would cover that

On 9/21/20, Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com> wrote:
> On September 21, 2020 1:36:11 PM EDT, ori@eigenstate.org wrote:
>>> this example has cleared up for me why gmail does such stupidity,
>>> sadly they were misleading and claimed the spam classification was
>>due
>>> to "similar to other spam".
>>>
>>> i can confirm that most of the incorrectly classified spam messages i
>>> get in gmail seem to have dmarc not set to none.
>>> i checked a few exemplary senders, one of which being a web forum
>>with
>>> quite a few messages every day.
>>>
>>> gmail itself also has it's dmarc set to none.
>>>
>>> so while gmail wants to force you to use dmarc (unverified, somebody
>>> claimed that on irc once) they don't seem to think anybody should
>>have
>>> to act upon it in any way ;)
>>
>>I'll pile on and summarize the discussion from cat-v
>>earlier today:
>>
>>Kvik's email was being shitcanned on gmail because
>>of his dkim conflicting with our munging. Dkim signs
>>headers that it expects anyone forwarding mail to
>>leave untouched. Kvik's list was excessive, but most
>>dkim configs will be unhappy with our rewrites, since
>>they want the subject left untouched.
>>
>>That leaves us 3 options:
>>
>>	1. Strip out DKIM entirely from forwarded emails.
>>	2. Don't mess with any headers we don't need to
>>	3. Implement DKIM, munge to our heart's content,
>>	   and re-sign.
>>
>>My vote is in favor of 2 right now, and maybe 3 if we
>>ever implement dkim in upas.
>>
>>This seems like a good summary of the situation.
>>
>>	https://begriffs.com/posts/2018-09-18-dmarc-mailing-list.html
>>
>>For reference, the headers gmail doesn't want us to touch are:
>>
>>	mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
>>
>>Not sure what the other big providers want.
>
> how does every other mailing list in the world manage modifying the subject
> line?
>
> sl
>