Hi Arian , Thank you for information. At least from about 11th December, detection of the spam have been increasing. I'll report them after I understand it. Regards, Takenobu 2016-12-25 18:34 GMT+09:00 Arian van Putten :

If I recall correctly it's being worked on. There is a plan to harden the haskell.org domain during the holidays by introducing DKIM and setting up DMARC. There is a thread in haskell-cafe titled "[Haskell-cafe] Work on mail.haskell.org beginning, please report any problems" with more info.

On Sun, 25 Dec 2016, 09:35 Takenobu Tani, wrote:

Hi,

I'm using gmail. Recently, many haskell's mails are detected as spam on gmail. (ghc-devs, haskell-cafe, ghc-commit, ...)

Does anyone know why? Do you know the workaround?

Regards, Takenobu

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.

I noticed this before the announcements of those changes. It was only for e-mails sent from Yahoo! mail. Since I know that Yahoo! has some stupid policies regarding DMARC I ignored it. This is an issue with almost all mailing lists in the world, just Yahoo! using stupid settings. On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 10:20 AM, John Wiegley wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

"TT" == Takenobu Tani writes:

TT> I'm using gmail. TT> Recently, many haskell's mails are detected as spam on gmail. TT> (ghc-devs, haskell-cafe, ghc-commit, ...)

TT> Does anyone know why? TT> Do you know the workaround?

This could be due to changes I've made recently on the mail server. Can you please send the full text of some of those mails to jwiegley@gmail.com?

Thanks, -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2 _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.

-- Mihai Maruseac (MM) "If you can't solve a problem, then there's an easier problem you can solve: find it." -- George Polya

...

...

...

...

"VD" == Viktor Dukhovni writes:

VD> If leaving the message unmolested is deemed no acceptable, then the VD> "mailman" list manager provides a number of alternative DMARC work-arounds VD> that mangle the message "From" field in various ways. Consult the mailman VD> docs. We recently enabled these workarounds (I think about 6 months ago?) in response to others telling us that mail wasn't being delivered. I think Gershom remembers doing this. Apparently, it's not enough of a solution. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

On Dec 26, 2016, at 6:31 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:

...

My personal preference, which I hope is acceptable to the list community, is to avoid modifying the message subject and body.

Does this also mean you cannot modify headers?

It means that you can add headers, but should avoid changing headers that are already present. DKIM signatures generally cover those headers that already present in a message, and leave room for additional headers.

That would be bad, because having a List-Id header enables "reply to list" and such.

The addition of "List-" headers does not break DKIM signatures, as origin DKIM signatures do not cover these (absent at the origin) headers. (I'm over simplifying, but the fine points are not important here).

...

That is, the onus of adding a "[Haskell-cafe] " subject prefix falls on message authors (and those who respond if the tag is not yet present).

I never understood why people want to mangle the subject line anyway; the recipient is easily seen in the "recipient" column of the list of mails. But maybe there's a reason to not have that column, IDK.

Some people really want subject tags. If they can do without, it is easier to avoid DMARC trouble, provided they can also do without footers.

...

And the list [message footer is not added.

The footer is actually nice to have. But in my book, that's not important enough to hinder dealing with spam filters.

Both the footer and subject tags would need to go. There's no point in changing just one of the settings. The DKIM signature covers both the message headers (as present at the origin) and the body content. -- Viktor.

On Dec 28, 2016, at 4:59 PM, Yitzchak Gale wrote:

I believe adding the unsubscribe link in the footer is required by law in the US.

There are plenty of lists with no such footers. For example, ietf@ietf.org, postfix-users@postfix.org, ... Mailing lists do subscription confirmation, so don't need opt-out. Unsubscribe instructions are also sent when first joining the list, and often in monthly list-membership reminders. In addition there a List-Unsubscribe header. So there's scant evince for the applicability of alleged requirement to add a footer. https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/can-spam-act-compli... Despite its name, the CAN-SPAM Act doesn’t apply just to bulk email. It covers all commercial messages, which the law defines as “any electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service,” including email that promotes content on commercial websites. The law makes no exception for business-to-business email. That means all email – for example, a message to former customers announcing a new product line – must comply with the law. Group interest mailing lists seem rather clearly out of scope. -- Viktor.

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:

Am 25.12.2016 um 23:59 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:

I never understood why people want to mangle the subject line anyway; the recipient is easily seen in the "recipient" column of the list of mails. But maybe there's a reason to not have that column, IDK.

Emails don't have "columns". These must be a feature of the particular email client you use.

On Dec 26, 2016, at 2:25 PM, Francesco Ariis wrote:

I wouldn't delete the footer, especially the unsub information. Some users are new to mailing lists and how they work; I frequently witness frustration and misunderstandings over how to unsubscribe.

Sure, but it is a trade-off. DMARC imposes a penalty on adding a footer, the DKIM signature breaks, and p=reject kicks in, unless we start mangling the From lines, which is IMHO worse, but opinions vary... On the postfix-users list, majordomo (not mailman) is configured to detect various attempts at (un)sub and blocks the post, responding to the user instead with helpful directions. False positives happen rarely, but as the list is email related, not never, and one has to rephrase some posts to get around the filter. -- Viktor.

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Niklas Hambüchen wrote:

Despite Google's public claims to the contrary, I have found the Gmail spam filter not to work too reliably

I think it depends on your use case (and it's rather indicative of the core problem of spam detection that spam is hard to distinguish from real messages about e.g. attached invoices). I've had maybe 8 Haskell list messages land in my spamtrap, gradually getting rarer as I "mark as not spam" them. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allbery.b@gmail.com ballbery@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net