[Nut-upsuser] Keeping the traffis on or off the list ?

[Matus UHLAR - fantomas]

On 17.02.24 09:29, Roger Price via Nut-upsuser wrote:
>I recently wrote to the list.  The distributed message had the 
>following headers:
>
>>Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 19:22:59 +0100 (CET)
>>From: Roger Price via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net>
>>Reply-To: Roger Price <roger at rogerprice.org>
>>To: nut-upsuser Mailing List <nut-upsuser at lists.alioth.debian.org>
>>Subject: ...
>
>Note that the Reply-To goes back to the original poster, not the list.
>Many mailing lists encourage the subscribers to "keep the list traffic 
>on the list", rather than wandering off into private discussions.  The 
>nut-upsuser setup has exactly the opposite effect.

This is side effect of adding list signatures (which many lists do because 
many users are often unaware of a concept of mailing lists) and message 
authentication mechanisms like SPF, DKIM and DMARC.

Many domains use these mechanism to prevent others from spoofing their 
mail and many providers (e.g.  gmail) require using these mechanisms on 
domains to accept mail from them.

It's impossible to forward mail without changing envelope from: address, 
since it would fail SPF check.

With modifying some headers and body it's impossible to keep original DKIM 
signature working and that's how DKIM works - it guarantees that mail was 
send from original domain as-is. 

While mailing list server may DKIM-sign all passing mail, in order to pass 
DMARC check, the mail must have either valid DKIM signature from domain in 
header From:, or it must pass SPF check from the same domain.

Thus, mailing lists change From: address to their domain and sign mail with 
their domain DKIM key. The resulting mail will have @alioth-lists.debian.net 
in envelope from: (thus pass SPF) and header From: (thus pass DKIM).

The only way now is to keep original sender address in Reply-To: header.

>Is it the intention to send the subscibers into private conversation?  
>If not, and I suspect not, then the current Reply-To looks like a bug.

It's necessary change. Users are welcome to use mail clients supporting 
mailing lists, or use Reply-All function of their MUA.

>Any replies to the list please.  Roger

I agree here.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Honk if you love peace and quiet.