-To learn more about SPF, visit http://www.openspf.org. This
-document does not explain the SPF fundamentals, you should
-read and understand the implications of deploying SPF on your
-system before doing so.
-
-SPF support is added via the libspf2 library. Visit
-
- http://www.libspf2.org/
-
-to obtain a copy, then compile and install it. By default,
-this will put headers in /usr/local/include and the static
-library in /usr/local/lib.
-
-To compile Exim with SPF support, set these additional flags in
-Local/Makefile:
-
-EXPERIMENTAL_SPF=yes
-CFLAGS=-DSPF -I/usr/local/include
-EXTRALIBS_EXIM=-L/usr/local/lib -lspf2
-
-This assumes that the libspf2 files are installed in
-their default locations.
-
-You can now run SPF checks in incoming SMTP by using the "spf"
-ACL condition in either the MAIL, RCPT or DATA ACLs. When
-using it in the RCPT ACL, you can make the checks dependend on
-the RCPT address (or domain), so you can check SPF records
-only for certain target domains. This gives you the
-possibility to opt-out certain customers that do not want
-their mail to be subject to SPF checking.
-
-The spf condition takes a list of strings on its right-hand
-side. These strings describe the outcome of the SPF check for
-which the spf condition should succeed. Valid strings are:
-
- o pass The SPF check passed, the sending host
- is positively verified by SPF.
- o fail The SPF check failed, the sending host
- is NOT allowed to send mail for the domain
- in the envelope-from address.
- o softfail The SPF check failed, but the queried
- domain can't absolutely confirm that this
- is a forgery.
- o none The queried domain does not publish SPF
- records.
- o neutral The SPF check returned a "neutral" state.
- This means the queried domain has published
- a SPF record, but wants to allow outside
- servers to send mail under its domain as well.
- o err_perm This indicates a syntax error in the SPF
- record of the queried domain. This should be
- treated like "none".
- o err_temp This indicates a temporary error during all
- processing, including Exim's SPF processing.
- You may defer messages when this occurs.
-
-You can prefix each string with an exclamation mark to invert
-is meaning, for example "!fail" will match all results but
-"fail". The string list is evaluated left-to-right, in a
-short-circuit fashion. When a string matches the outcome of
-the SPF check, the condition succeeds. If none of the listed
-strings matches the outcome of the SPF check, the condition
-fails.
-
-Here is an example to fail forgery attempts from domains that
-publish SPF records:
-
-/* -----------------
-deny message = $sender_host_address is not allowed to send mail from ${if def:sender_address_domain {$sender_address_domain}{$sender_helo_name}}. \
- Please see http://www.openspf.org/Why?scope=${if def:sender_address_domain {mfrom}{helo}};identity=${if def:sender_address_domain {$sender_address}{$sender_helo_name}};ip=$sender_host_address
- spf = fail
---------------------- */
-
-You can also give special treatment to specific domains:
-
-/* -----------------
-deny message = AOL sender, but not from AOL-approved relay.
- sender_domains = aol.com
- spf = fail:neutral
---------------------- */
-
-Explanation: AOL publishes SPF records, but is liberal and
-still allows non-approved relays to send mail from aol.com.
-This will result in a "neutral" state, while mail from genuine
-AOL servers will result in "pass". The example above takes
-this into account and treats "neutral" like "fail", but only
-for aol.com. Please note that this violates the SPF draft.
-
-When the spf condition has run, it sets up several expansion
-variables.
-
- $spf_header_comment
- This contains a human-readable string describing the outcome
- of the SPF check. You can add it to a custom header or use
- it for logging purposes.
-
- $spf_received
- This contains a complete Received-SPF: header that can be
- added to the message. Please note that according to the SPF
- draft, this header must be added at the top of the header
- list. Please see section 10 on how you can do this.
-
- Note: in case of "Best-guess" (see below), the convention is
- to put this string in a header called X-SPF-Guess: instead.
-
- $spf_result
- This contains the outcome of the SPF check in string form,
- one of pass, fail, softfail, none, neutral, err_perm or
- err_temp.
-
- $spf_smtp_comment
- This contains a string that can be used in a SMTP response
- to the calling party. Useful for "fail".
-
-In addition to SPF, you can also perform checks for so-called
-"Best-guess". Strictly speaking, "Best-guess" is not standard
-SPF, but it is supported by the same framework that enables SPF
-capability. Refer to http://www.openspf.org/FAQ/Best_guess_record
-for a description of what it means.
-
-To access this feature, simply use the spf_guess condition in place
-of the spf one. For example:
-
-/* -----------------
-deny message = $sender_host_address doesn't look trustworthy to me
- spf_guess = fail
---------------------- */
-
-In case you decide to reject messages based on this check, you
-should note that although it uses the same framework, "Best-guess"
-is NOT SPF, and therefore you should not mention SPF at all in your
-reject message.
-
-When the spf_guess condition has run, it sets up the same expansion
-variables as when spf condition is run, described above.
-
-Additionally, since Best-guess is not standarized, you may redefine
-what "Best-guess" means to you by redefining spf_guess variable in
-global config. For example, the following:
-
-/* -----------------
-spf_guess = v=spf1 a/16 mx/16 ptr ?all
---------------------- */
-
-would relax host matching rules to a broader network range.
-
-
-SRS (Sender Rewriting Scheme) Support
+Sample configuration:
+
+(Router)
+
+scan:
+ driver = accept
+ transport = scan
+
+(Transport)
+
+scan:
+ driver = queuefile
+ directory = /var/spool/baruwa-scanner/input
+
+
+In order to build exim with Queuefile transport support add or uncomment
+
+EXPERIMENTAL_QUEUEFILE=yes
+
+to your Local/Makefile. (Re-)build/install exim. exim -d should show
+Experimental_QUEUEFILE in the line "Support for:".
+
+
+ARC support
+-----------
+Specification: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-11
+Note that this is not an RFC yet, so may change.
+
+[RFC 8617 was published 2019/06. Draft 11 was 2018/01. A review of the
+changes has not yet been done]
+
+ARC is intended to support the utility of SPF and DKIM in the presence of
+intermediaries in the transmission path - forwarders and mailinglists -
+by establishing a cryptographically-signed chain in headers.
+
+Normally one would only bother doing ARC-signing when functioning as
+an intermediary. One might do verify for local destinations.
+
+ARC uses the notion of a "ADministrative Management Domain" (ADMD).
+Described in RFC 5598 (section 2.3), this is essentially a set of
+mail-handling systems that mail transits that are all under the control
+of one organisation. A label should be chosen to identify the ADMD.
+Messages should be ARC-verified on entry to the ADMD, and ARC-signed on exit
+from it.
+
+
+Building with ARC Support
+--
+Enable using EXPERIMENTAL_ARC=yes in your Local/Makefile.
+You must also have DKIM present (not disabled), and you very likely
+want to have SPF enabled.
+
+
+Verification
+--
+An ACL condition is provided to perform the "verifier actions" detailed
+in section 6 of the above specification. It may be called from the DATA ACL
+and succeeds if the result matches any of a given list.
+It also records the highest ARC instance number (the chain size)
+and verification result for later use in creating an Authentication-Results:
+standard header.
+
+ verify = arc/<acceptable_list> none:fail:pass
+
+ add_header = :at_start:${authresults {<admd-identifier>}}
+
+ Note that it would be wise to strip incoming messages of A-R headers
+ that claim to be from our own <admd-identifier>. Eg:
+
+ remove_header = \N^(?i)Authentication-Results\s*::\s*example.org;\N
+
+There are four new variables:
+
+ $arc_state One of pass, fail, none
+ $arc_state_reason (if fail, why)
+ $arc_domains colon-sep list of ARC chain domains, in chain order.
+ problematic elements may have empty list elements
+ $arc_oldest_pass lowest passing instance number of chain
+
+Example:
+ logwrite = oldest-p-ams: <${reduce {$lh_ARC-Authentication-Results:} \
+ {} \
+ {${if = {$arc_oldest_pass} \
+ {${extract {i}{${extract {1}{;}{$item}}}}} \
+ {$item} {$value}}} \
+ }>
+
+Receive log lines for an ARC pass will be tagged "ARC".
+
+
+Signing
+--
+arc_sign = <admd-identifier> : <selector> : <privkey> [ : <options> ]
+An option on the smtp transport, which constructs and prepends to the message
+an ARC set of headers. The textually-first Authentication-Results: header
+is used as a basis (you must have added one on entry to the ADMD).
+Expanded as a whole; if unset, empty or forced-failure then no signing is done.
+If it is set, all of the first three elements must be non-empty.
+
+The fourth element is optional, and if present consists of a comma-separated list
+of options. The options implemented are
+
+ timestamps Add a t= tag to the generated AMS and AS headers, with the
+ current time.
+ expire[=<val>] Add an x= tag to the generated AMS header, with an expiry time.
+ If the value <val> is an plain number it is used unchanged.
+ If it starts with a '+' then the following number is added
+ to the current time, as an offset in seconds.
+ If a value is not given it defaults to a one month offset.
+
+[As of writing, gmail insist that a t= tag on the AS is mandatory]
+
+Caveats:
+ * There must be an Authentication-Results header, presumably added by an ACL
+ while receiving the message, for the same ADMD, for arc_sign to succeed.
+ This requires careful coordination between inbound and outbound logic.
+
+ Only one A-R header is taken account of. This is a limitation versus
+ the ARC spec (which says that all A-R headers from within the ADMD must
+ be used).
+
+ * If passing a message to another system, such as a mailing-list manager
+ (MLM), between receipt and sending, be wary of manipulations to headers made
+ by the MLM.
+ + For instance, Mailman with REMOVE_DKIM_HEADERS==3 might improve
+ deliverability in a pre-ARC world, but that option also renames the
+ Authentication-Results header, which breaks signing.
+
+ * Even if you use multiple DKIM keys for different domains, the ARC concept
+ should try to stick to one ADMD, so pick a primary domain and use that for
+ AR headers and outbound signing.
+
+Signing is not compatible with cutthrough delivery; any (before expansion)
+value set for the option will result in cutthrough delivery not being
+used via the transport in question.
+
+
+
+Dovecot authenticator via inet socket
git://git.exim.org / exim.git / blobdiff