UNH - DMARC issue

UNH - DMARC issue

[Aaron Conole]

Hi all,

UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
the lab.

I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
to make sure you're aware.

-Aaron

RE: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> To: techboard@dpdk.org
> Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> the lab.
> 
> I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> to make sure you're aware.
> 
> -Aaron

Hello, and apologies for the delay,

I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.

Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?

Thanks,
Ali

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Lincoln Lavoie]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2029 bytes --]

HI Ali,

The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
example is one that failed, correct?

Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation,
just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does
the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was
more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > To: techboard@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org
> > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > the lab.
> >
> > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > to make sure you're aware.
> >
> > -Aaron
>
> Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>
> I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't
> see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>
> Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't
> being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
>
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>


-- 
*Lincoln Lavoie*
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
<https://www.iol.unh.edu>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3922 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: rawmail_20230208081905.C6CB9600AB.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 7411 bytes --]

X-Received: by 2002:a37:4117:0:b0:71b:6927:5623 with SMTP id o23-20020a374117000000b0071b69275623mr674515qka.200.1675844347163;
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:19:07 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu
Received: by 2002:a05:622a:2508:b0:3b8:5e2f:928e with SMTP id
cm8-20020a05622a250800b003b85e2f928els19067437qtb.1.-pod-prod-gmail; Wed, 08
Feb 2023 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e8e:0:b0:3ba:26b8:5505 with SMTP id 14-20020ac84e8e000000b003ba26b85505mr8618983qtp.65.1675844346314;
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1675844346; cv=none;
d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
b=wly2/SrcLmm07wc5yklYnQodYlWbmYgdnGV6S8U9b7FinyCbA+8yb3nIw/i1ehaxRx
bDAkp6LFjueete9X3hYEBTT51G44XBUGXHsKP28zWlS7+BRTQ9MBgcJqhGDd01Lnu97p
ccvbJrQBTAelnXYnOdeKYuDRSAD8yf5jAO/oijrZ4/slGPdHWOYKGblk6qsy23HJjTR5
oEuwhGcMMYsuZZi1DCp1dibSjEx6vMFWsw4kl09r896Ux1kJ/1kFgxYzXPBfD9UL2ndv
AsxWv1JRPpokGpV4Rb1XGTLuz2fOc7edX2EMfdHfhTnQKAmV/TqnTXxx81ROuwE4Hs3I
rmvQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816;
h=date:message-id:cc:to:from:subject:mime-version:dkim-signature;
bh=KfX/Tm1gPCCWdo6Lx6oLS2aqH7OzZ//9KYuUVsO8xZ0=;
b=trmBbxI+LVc7E150xaCIUyMlIolp8YavmGM2Srn6h3W6nOMNCVE/0B3r24/l97Hqo7
hI7D/KIl0+usay+Q58O7Txd4xuN9PAa/Ir9lbqDnF7WOo/9RlN+/bDdhfS1Dz9MKTVLS
IYTGST4PRbb5X1Snb+6ktCo2VcTUDQalIfX8y+IORgCt8A2VvK9onyRQQY8o/AwRkw6l
lOYOldtRIyUIclo4TjehjF/pfGdlFGLohoHOn3eFDTXKfMEL3e+RuhieteQXpG+nvHMr
yixxfS+Y7IEKygHXjPMVL5FlpUziW9Au7N3taF9UMagXkma9fUXez+daR+J2GLJNXgX1
KL1g==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
dkim=pass header.i=@iol.unh.edu header.s=unh-iol header.b=eF4sO6UR;
spf=pass (google.com: domain of dpdklab@iol.unh.edu designates 209.85.220.97 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dpdklab@iol.unh.edu;
dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=iol.unh.edu
Return-Path: <dpdklab@iol.unh.edu>
Received: from mail-sor-f97.google.com (mail-sor-f97.google.com. [209.85.220.97])
by mx.google.com with SMTPS id z9-20020ac84309000000b003b9bb1236d4sor12000057qtm.93.2023.02.08.00.19.06
for <dpdklab@iol.unh.edu>
(Google Transport Security);
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dpdklab@iol.unh.edu designates 209.85.220.97 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.97;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
dkim=pass header.i=@iol.unh.edu header.s=unh-iol header.b=eF4sO6UR;
spf=pass (google.com: domain of dpdklab@iol.unh.edu designates 209.85.220.97 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dpdklab@iol.unh.edu;
dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=iol.unh.edu
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol;
h=date:message-id:cc:to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject
:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=KfX/Tm1gPCCWdo6Lx6oLS2aqH7OzZ//9KYuUVsO8xZ0=;
b=eF4sO6URk5k7fRddzW9d1c9iTR4iGYa0eHHBkz9DUP3rpHRzjae90eQZrbnCMDMmsh
i42ggpN6ycyT9Ag6KzFwdynuxFsubsT3oZl9pK2YOQJpcYTbTFYsiE4P/1pggi4iq4+m
0oj2uMq4RNT9xfXEt9tSv6MY/SWdfM//jyN+8=
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=date:message-id:cc:to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=KfX/Tm1gPCCWdo6Lx6oLS2aqH7OzZ//9KYuUVsO8xZ0=;
b=coBfl2fOqxA3yvYYU337RVes8E7GyVSX0P8Fx3JRT6Lmv7V3awK4IgEWICeq4zh+I4
69R96bbkFFnE20TYmHD/1cLwrviyp8GhXX65pswHIWpyCG8naGGBTFm8XfAZ9QGF777y
Ga93FHS1gPDcX88w3yPCBzQOpvHbVeC9vnZG+ZNeavrCZYnWJ+G3Lm0M423xE3KA71ys
Bqmx5JdEoDJrY1QplrN6JeLUiJTrQ2ZBPbJFkOHifpdHs9TVpJLN6OhatY/m2m/1sMUQ
eNQm347hs/CK0CBnhI6NAfzy+EdI3+zwbRr8WGzs9lesbsmNbcY4Suy2ykXnKb9h6HmE
rWgA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKU84xkyxueQHyeVC7pP67FFLjhCoaJp7sFHJtdUc/4tGGIAPeko
kUbkGi5Qo3AwbFQzHvxd+O/g0toSqwm1XKGBaa68DQkee3vWeJjr
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:2446:b0:3b9:bc8c:c20f with SMTP id bl6-20020a05622a244600b003b9bc8cc20fmr24965749qtb.26.1675844346087;
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <dpdklab@iol.unh.edu>
Received: from postal.iol.unh.edu (postal.iol.unh.edu. [132.177.123.84])
by smtp-relay.gmail.com with ESMTPS id w15-20020a05620a444f00b00706999a2abfsm1079722qkp.7.2023.02.08.00.19.06
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Relaying-Domain: iol.unh.edu
Received: from dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu (unknown [172.18.0.210])
by postal.iol.unh.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8570605246B;
Wed, 8 Feb 2023 03:19:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dpdk-ubuntu-2.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu (localhost [IPv6:::1])
by dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6CB9600AB;
Wed, 8 Feb 2023 08:19:05 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7525862446435516154=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: |SUCCESS| pw123257-123268 [PATCH] [v3,12/12] mldev: support to get debug info and test device
From: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu
To: Test Report <test-report@dpdk.org>
Cc: dpdklab@iol.unh.edu, David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Message-Id: <20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 08:19:05 +0000 (UTC)

--===============7525862446435516154==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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--===============7525862446435516154==--

RE: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3124 bytes --]

> Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.

> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.

Regards,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

HI Ali,

The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi all,
>
> UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> the lab.
>
> I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> to make sure you're aware.
>
> -Aaron

Hello, and apologies for the delay,

I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.

Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?

Thanks,
Ali


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8595 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Lincoln Lavoie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3698 bytes --]

Hi Ali,

We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you confirm
if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am also
also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to see if
failures are still being reported to us.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:

> > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>
>
>
> Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
>
>
>
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
>
>
> Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking
> DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
>
>
> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> *To:* Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> *Cc:* Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; Lincoln
> Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org
> *Subject:* Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
>
>
> HI Ali,
>
>
>
> The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
> internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
> example is one that failed, correct?
>
>
>
> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation,
> just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does
> the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was
> more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > To: techboard@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>; ci@dpdk.org
> > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > the lab.
> >
> > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > to make sure you're aware.
> >
> > -Aaron
>
> Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>
> I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't
> see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>
> Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't
> being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
>
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Lincoln Lavoie*
>
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
>
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>
> <https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>


-- 
*Lincoln Lavoie*
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
<https://www.iol.unh.edu>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9111 bytes --]

RE: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4661 bytes --]

Hi Lincoln,

Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your client:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

I’m checking if there is something I missed.

Regards,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

Hi Ali,

We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to see if failures are still being reported to us.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.

> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.

Regards,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

HI Ali,

The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi all,
>
> UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> the lab.
>
> I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> to make sure you're aware.
>
> -Aaron

Hello, and apologies for the delay,

I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.

Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?

Thanks,
Ali


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 15204 bytes --]

RE: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5603 bytes --]

Hello,

After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will update hopefully by end of next week.

Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being encoded.

Regards,
Ali

From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue

Hi Lincoln,

Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your client:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

I’m checking if there is something I missed.

Regards,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

Hi Ali,

We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to see if failures are still being reported to us.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.

> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.

Regards,
Ali

From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

HI Ali,

The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?

Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi all,
>
> UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> the lab.
>
> I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> to make sure you're aware.
>
> -Aaron

Hello, and apologies for the delay,

I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.

Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/

Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?

Thanks,
Ali


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>


--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 17440 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Thomas Monjalon]

Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?


01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
> Hello,
> 
> After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will update hopefully by end of next week.
> 
> Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being encoded.
> 
> Regards,
> Ali
> 
> From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
> To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
> 
> Hi Lincoln,
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
> Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your client:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> 
> I’m checking if there is something I missed.
> 
> Regards,
> Ali
> 
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> 
> Hi Ali,
> 
> We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to see if failures are still being reported to us.
> 
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
> 
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
> 
> Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
> 
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> 
> Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
> 
> Regards,
> Ali
> 
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> 
> HI Ali,
> 
> The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
> 
> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> 
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
> 
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > the lab.
> >
> > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > to make sure you're aware.
> >
> > -Aaron
> 
> Hello, and apologies for the delay,
> 
> I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
> 
> Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> 
> Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ali
> 
> 
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> 
> 
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> 

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Lincoln Lavoie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6837 bytes --]

Hi Ali,

Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our tooling.

We can also limit the subject lines.  Do you know the "safe" length from
mailman?

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:

> Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
> Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?
>
>
> 01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
> > Hello,
> >
> > After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken
> DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are
> folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform
> with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per
> list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will
> update hopefully by end of next week.
> >
> > Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now
> in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being
> encoded.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
> > To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi Lincoln,
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
> > Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are
> still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your
> client:
> >
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> >
> > I’m checking if there is something I missed.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
> ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi Ali,
> >
> > We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you
> confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am
> also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to
> see if failures are still being reported to us.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lincoln
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:
> alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
> >
> > Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
> >
> > > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> >
> > Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking
> DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <
> lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
> ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > HI Ali,
> >
> > The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
> internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
> example is one that failed, correct?
> >
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lincoln
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:
> alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> > > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>;
> ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> > > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > > the lab.
> > >
> > > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > > to make sure you're aware.
> > >
> > > -Aaron
> >
> > Hello, and apologies for the delay,
> >
> > I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't
> see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
> >
> > Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc
> isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
> >
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> >
> > Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ali
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Lavoie
> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> > [
> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Lavoie
> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> > [
> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
*Lincoln Lavoie*
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
<https://www.iol.unh.edu>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12396 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8875 bytes --]

Hello,

I see that it's keeping the subject header intact for up to 70 characters:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302085826.D4061601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
> Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3] vhost: fix madvise arguments alignment

A subject of 71 char length is being folded:
https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302101540.558F0601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
> Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue model
>  info

I didn't look into how exactly the folding algorithm for the python email library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 to be safe?

You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the subject I guess?

Thanks,
Ali

________________________________
From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM
To: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>; Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org <techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue

Hi Ali,

Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our tooling.

We can also limit the subject lines.  Do you know the "safe" length from mailman?

Cheers,
Lincoln

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net<mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:
Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?


01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
> Hello,
>
> After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will update hopefully by end of next week.
>
> Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being encoded.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
> To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi Lincoln,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
> Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your client:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> I’m checking if there is something I missed.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com><mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com><mailto:aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org><mailto:techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org><mailto:ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi Ali,
>
> We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to see if failures are still being reported to us.
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com><mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>> wrote:
> > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>
> Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
>
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
> Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
>
> Regards,
> Ali
>
> From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com><mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>>
> Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com><mailto:aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>>; techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org><mailto:techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>>; Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org><mailto:ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>>
> Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> HI Ali,
>
> The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>
> Changing the content / format type will need a little more investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com><mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com><mailto:aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org><mailto:techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>>
> > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org><mailto:ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>>
> > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > the lab.
> >
> > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > to make sure you're aware.
> >
> > -Aaron
>
> Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>
> I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>
> Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>
> Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Lavoie
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu><mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> [https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>







--
Lincoln Lavoie
Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
https://www.iol.unh.edu
+1-603-674-2755 (m)
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI]<https://www.iol.unh.edu>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 18101 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Patrick Robb]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8646 bytes --]

>
> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
> subject I guess?

I think I'll just take the existing subject line string and at the end cut
all characters after 68. That way we can at least get 20 or so characters
from the commit message summary in there, which will look kind of weird but
some summary is better than nothing.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:43 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I see that it's keeping the subject header intact for up to 70 characters:
>
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302085826.D4061601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3] vhost: fix madvise arguments
> alignment
>
> A subject of 71 char length is being folded:
>
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302101540.558F0601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue
> model
> >  info
>
> I didn't look into how exactly the folding algorithm for the python email
> library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 to be safe?
>
> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
> subject I guess?
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM
> *To:* NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) <thomas@monjalon.net>
> *Cc:* Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>; Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>;
> techboard@dpdk.org <techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
> *Subject:* Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>
> Hi Ali,
>
> Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our tooling.
>
> We can also limit the subject lines.  Do you know the "safe" length from
> mailman?
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> wrote:
>
> Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
> Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?
>
>
> 01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
> > Hello,
> >
> > After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken
> DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are
> folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform
> with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per
> list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will
> update hopefully by end of next week.
> >
> > Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now
> in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being
> encoded.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
> > To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi Lincoln,
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
> > Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are
> still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your
> client:
> >
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> >
> > I’m checking if there is something I missed.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
> ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > Hi Ali,
> >
> > We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you
> confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am
> also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to
> see if failures are still being reported to us.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lincoln
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:
> alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
> >
> > Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
> >
> > > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> >
> > Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking
> DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ali
> >
> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <
> lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
> ci@dpdk.org>
> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
> >
> > HI Ali,
> >
> > The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
> internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
> example is one that failed, correct?
> >
> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lincoln
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:
> alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
> > > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
> > > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>;
> ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
> > > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement "soon."
> > > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
> > > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
> > > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list to
> > > the lab.
> > >
> > > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
> > > to make sure you're aware.
> > >
> > > -Aaron
> >
> > Hello, and apologies for the delay,
> >
> > I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I don't
> see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
> >
> > Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc
> isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
> >
> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
> >
> > Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ali
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Lavoie
> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> > [
> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Lavoie
> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> > [
> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Lincoln Lavoie*
> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
> https://www.iol.unh.edu
> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
> <https://www.iol.unh.edu>
>


-- 

Patrick Robb

Technical Service Manager

UNH InterOperability Laboratory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

www.iol.unh.edu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 20099 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Patrick Robb]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9308 bytes --]

We started limiting the subject line length over the weekend, so this
should be all resolved now. Ali please let us know if there are any issues.

On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 5:07 PM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:

> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
>> subject I guess?
>
> I think I'll just take the existing subject line string and at the end cut
> all characters after 68. That way we can at least get 20 or so characters
> from the commit message summary in there, which will look kind of weird but
> some summary is better than nothing.
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:43 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I see that it's keeping the subject header intact for up to 70 characters:
>>
>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302085826.D4061601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3] vhost: fix madvise arguments
>> alignment
>>
>> A subject of 71 char length is being folded:
>>
>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302101540.558F0601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue
>> model
>> >  info
>>
>> I didn't look into how exactly the folding algorithm for the python email
>> library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 to be safe?
>>
>> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
>> subject I guess?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ali
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM
>> *To:* NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> *Cc:* Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>; Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>;
>> techboard@dpdk.org <techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>>
>> Hi Ali,
>>
>> Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our
>> tooling.
>>
>> We can also limit the subject lines.  Do you know the "safe" length from
>> mailman?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lincoln
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
>> Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?
>>
>>
>> 01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken
>> DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are
>> folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform
>> with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per
>> list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will
>> update hopefully by end of next week.
>> >
>> > Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable now
>> in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer being
>> encoded.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ali
>> >
>> > From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
>> > To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
>> > Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
>> >
>> > Hi Lincoln,
>> >
>> > Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
>> > Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are
>> still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your
>> client:
>> >
>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>> >
>> > I’m checking if there is something I missed.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ali
>> >
>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>> >>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
>> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
>> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
>> ci@dpdk.org>
>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>> >
>> > Hi Ali,
>> >
>> > We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you
>> confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am
>> also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to
>> see if failures are still being reported to us.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Lincoln
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com
>> <mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
>> > > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>> >
>> > Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
>> >
>> > > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>> >
>> > Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman, breaking
>> DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ali
>> >
>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>> >>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
>> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
>> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <
>> lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
>> ci@dpdk.org>
>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>> >
>> > HI Ali,
>> >
>> > The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
>> internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
>> example is one that failed, correct?
>> >
>> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Lincoln
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:
>> alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
>> > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
>> > > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
>> > > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>;
>> ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
>> > > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
>> > >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement
>> "soon."
>> > > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
>> > > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
>> > > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list
>> to
>> > > the lab.
>> > >
>> > > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email here
>> > > to make sure you're aware.
>> > >
>> > > -Aaron
>> >
>> > Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>> >
>> > I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I
>> don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>> >
>> > Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc
>> isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
>> >
>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>> >
>> > Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
>> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Ali
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Lincoln Lavoie
>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>> > [
>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
>> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Lincoln Lavoie
>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>> > [
>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
>> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lincoln Lavoie*
>> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>> https://www.iol.unh.edu
>> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>> <https://www.iol.unh.edu>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Patrick Robb
>
> Technical Service Manager
>
> UNH InterOperability Laboratory
>
> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
>
> www.iol.unh.edu
>
>
>

-- 

Patrick Robb

Technical Service Manager

UNH InterOperability Laboratory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

www.iol.unh.edu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 22666 bytes --]

Re: UNH - DMARC issue

[Patrick Robb]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10032 bytes --]

Hi Ali,

We ran a DMARC report which showed errors on Friday, but none since then.
Given that there have been patch series submitted over the weekend, this
appears to be resolved now.

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 9:43 AM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:

> We started limiting the subject line length over the weekend, so this
> should be all resolved now. Ali please let us know if there are any issues.
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 5:07 PM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
>> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
>>> subject I guess?
>>
>> I think I'll just take the existing subject line string and at the end
>> cut all characters after 68. That way we can at least get 20 or so
>> characters from the commit message summary in there, which will look kind
>> of weird but some summary is better than nothing.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:43 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I see that it's keeping the subject header intact for up to 70
>>> characters:
>>>
>>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302085826.D4061601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
>>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124617 [PATCH] [v3] vhost: fix madvise arguments
>>> alignment
>>>
>>> A subject of 71 char length is being folded:
>>>
>>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230302101540.558F0601DC@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/raw
>>> > Subject: |SUCCESS| pw124605 [PATCH] [v2] net/idpf: refine Rx/Tx queue
>>> model
>>> >  info
>>>
>>> I didn't look into how exactly the folding algorithm for the python
>>> email library works though. Maybe cap at 64-68 to be safe?
>>>
>>> You'd have to cap it by removing the commit message summary from the
>>> subject I guess?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ali
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 1, 2023 10:35 PM
>>> *To:* NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL) <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>> *Cc:* Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>; Aaron Conole <
>>> aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org <techboard@dpdk.org>;
>>> ci@dpdk.org <ci@dpdk.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>>>
>>> Hi Ali,
>>>
>>> Yes, plain text is here to stay, it's been updated in all of our
>>> tooling.
>>>
>>> We can also limit the subject lines.  Do you know the "safe" length from
>>> mailman?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Lincoln
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 3:21 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Instead of patching, can we just make sure the subject is shorter?
>>> Is there an impact in limiting the subject length?
>>>
>>>
>>> 01/03/2023 20:52, Ali Alnubani:
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > After further investigation, I see now that some reports have broken
>>> DKIM signatures because Mailman (or the email libraries it uses) are
>>> folding their long subject headers into multiple lines, probably to conform
>>> with internet standards. There isn’t a configuration to control this per
>>> list in Mailman though, so I might have to look into patching it. Will
>>> update hopefully by end of next week.
>>> >
>>> > Can you keep the emails in plaintext format? They are more readable
>>> now in https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/ as the body is no longer
>>> being encoded.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Ali
>>> >
>>> > From: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 3:10 PM
>>> > To: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>; techboard@dpdk.org; ci@dpdk.org
>>> > Subject: RE: UNH - DMARC issue
>>> >
>>> > Hi Lincoln,
>>> >
>>> > Thank you for taking the time to make the change.
>>> > Unfortunately, however, I see that even some of the plaintext ones are
>>> still failing DMARC. This is an example if you want to check from your
>>> client:
>>> >
>>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230301075112.591AB601B1@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>>> >
>>> > I’m checking if there is something I missed.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Ali
>>> >
>>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>>> >>
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 10:57 PM
>>> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
>>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
>>> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
>>> ci@dpdk.org>
>>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>>> >
>>> > Hi Ali,
>>> >
>>> > We deployed the change to only plaintext emails last week.  Can you
>>> confirm if this improves things from your side for the DMARC results.  I am
>>> also also our IT admin to pull the reports for the past couple of days to
>>> see if failures are still being reported to us.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Lincoln
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com
>>> <mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
>>> > > Just to make sure, your example is one that failed, correct?
>>> >
>>> > Correct, the copy I got failed DKIM and DMARC authentication.
>>> >
>>> > > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
>>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
>>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
>>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>>> >
>>> > Non plaintext emails are more likely to be mangled by Mailman,
>>> breaking DKIM signature verification, and DMARC as a result.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Ali
>>> >
>>> > From: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>>> >>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:37 PM
>>> > To: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com<mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>>
>>> > Cc: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>;
>>> techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>; Lincoln Lavoie <
>>> lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>; ci@dpdk.org<mailto:
>>> ci@dpdk.org>
>>> > Subject: Re: UNH - DMARC issue
>>> >
>>> > HI Ali,
>>> >
>>> > The To / Cc fields all look identical to what was sent / logged on our
>>> internal list.  I've attached the raw stuff email. Just to make sure, your
>>> example is one that failed, correct?
>>> >
>>> > Changing the content / format type will need a little more
>>> investigation, just to make sure the change wouldn't break other emails
>>> being sent. Does the message content type impact the DMARC evaluation?  I
>>> thought it was more about headers, routing, and approved mail hosts, etc.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Lincoln
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 4:02 AM Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com
>>> <mailto:alialnu@nvidia.com>> wrote:
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com<mailto:aconole@redhat.com>>
>>> > > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 4:42 PM
>>> > > To: techboard@dpdk.org<mailto:techboard@dpdk.org>
>>> > > Cc: Lincoln Lavoie <lylavioe@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavioe@iol.unh.edu>>;
>>> ci@dpdk.org<mailto:ci@dpdk.org>
>>> > > Subject: UNH - DMARC issue
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi all,
>>> > >
>>> > > UNH reported that their IT will be turning on DMARC enforcement
>>> "soon."
>>> > > I'm not sure when that will exactly take place, but as part of that,
>>> > > they found there was an issue with the DPDK mailing lists doing some
>>> > > header rewriting which will break email bounces via the mailing list
>>> to
>>> > > the lab.
>>> > >
>>> > > I think Ali is currently investigating, but I'm sending the email
>>> here
>>> > > to make sure you're aware.
>>> > >
>>> > > -Aaron
>>> >
>>> > Hello, and apologies for the delay,
>>> >
>>> > I can confirm that DMARC is failing for some of the reports, but I
>>> don't see obvious mangling to the headers or bodies of these emails.
>>> >
>>> > Can you please help verify that the list of recipients in To and Cc
>>> isn't being mangled for the reports failing DMARC? Example:
>>> >
>>> https://inbox.dpdk.org/test-report/20230208081905.C6CB9600AB@dpdk-ubuntu.dpdklab.iol.unh.edu/
>>> >
>>> > Would it also be possible to switch the format/content-type of these
>>> emails from html to text/plain as way to try and mitigate this?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Ali
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Lincoln Lavoie
>>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
>>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>>> > [
>>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
>>> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Lincoln Lavoie
>>> > Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>>> > 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>>> > lylavoie@iol.unh.edu<mailto:lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>
>>> > https://www.iol.unh.edu
>>> > +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>>> > [
>>> https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4xlKa1qM3IJKocZErE7ywuQuw_cfMEDW_tlU6Dw8dHUTWPjdawcJawE6HcYf7_JfXJnr9fvVJI
>>> ]<https://www.iol.unh.edu/>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Lincoln Lavoie*
>>> Principal Engineer, Broadband Technologies
>>> 21 Madbury Rd., Ste. 100, Durham, NH 03824
>>> lylavoie@iol.unh.edu
>>> https://www.iol.unh.edu
>>> +1-603-674-2755 (m)
>>> <https://www.iol.unh.edu>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Patrick Robb
>>
>> Technical Service Manager
>>
>> UNH InterOperability Laboratory
>>
>> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
>>
>> www.iol.unh.edu
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Patrick Robb
>
> Technical Service Manager
>
> UNH InterOperability Laboratory
>
> 21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824
>
> www.iol.unh.edu
>
>
>

-- 

Patrick Robb

Technical Service Manager

UNH InterOperability Laboratory

21 Madbury Rd, Suite 100, Durham, NH 03824

www.iol.unh.edu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 25330 bytes --]

RE: UNH - DMARC issue

[Ali Alnubani]

> Hi Ali,
> 
> We ran a DMARC report which showed errors on Friday, but none since then. Given that there have been patch series submitted over the weekend, this appears to be resolved now. 

Thanks for the update.

Regards,
Ali