3 exim -DSERVER=server -bd -oX PORT_D
7 # Mail original in aux-fixed/4560.msg1.txt
8 # Sig generated by: perl aux-fixed/dkim/sign_arc.pl < aux-fixed/4560.msg1.txt
9 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
13 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
19 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; d=test.ex; s=sel; t=1521752658; b=
20 xcIN0OEpAc3s8riODm31Q6JgmIECch3iVd1LXWwsypGpCY2UFFuo5HhCEf4a043q
21 YZ+zn/MbFFkvwIqleeQkJ7S5UcvfM8dv/V4YnwAe+JD8r79glh/FRq6uKlc0ixLS
22 CllJMwj98J1P1K9+gwmO5TrD1eTZV68caZj77P+X2kw=
23 ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=test.ex;
24 h=from:to:date:message-id:subject; s=sel; bh=3UbbJTudPxmejzh7U1
25 Zg33U3QT+16kfV2eOTvMeiEis=; b=WgE+YWSm48w/P448gPlBBNCKt2SJ4gosPx
26 0JQ98aZJhun2RaVcUO3INc+kZv8YOijofMzFqJxVn1cgMjoU8/QSHIyyt40FzkQB
27 oSGmSrCjtRnzS8pbp491NX3kGuetidaWE5muPSdOystg6mm1rBnl9sqVrwaynCmr
29 ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; test.ex; arc=none
30 Authentication-Results: test.ex; arc=none
32 To: bakawolf@yahoo.com
33 Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 17:00:07 -0700
34 Message-ID: <qwerty1234@disco-zombie.net>
37 This is a simple test.
43 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
48 # We send this one through one forwarding hop.
49 # It starts off bare, so the forwarder reception gets an ARC status of "none".
50 # The outbound signs it with that, and the final receiver is happy to pass it.
52 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
56 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
71 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
73 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
84 # We send this one through two forwarding hops.
85 # It starts off bare, so the 1st forwarder reception gets an ARC status of "none".
86 # The outbound signs it with that, and the 2nd forwarder is happy to pass it.
87 # The outbound signs again, and the final receiver is happy.
89 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
93 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
108 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
110 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
112 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
123 # We send this one through one forwarder, one mailinglist, and one more forwarder
125 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
129 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
131 RCPT TO:<zmza@test.ex>
144 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
146 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
148 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
150 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
161 # We send this one through two forwarders, then one ARC-unaware mailinglist
162 # then one more forwarder
164 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
168 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
170 RCPT TO:<zzmza@test.ex>
183 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
185 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
187 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -DOPTION -q
189 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
191 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
202 # We send this one through a forwarders, then an ARC-unaware forwarder
204 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
208 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
210 RCPT TO:<zza@test.ex>
223 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
225 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -DOPTION -q
227 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
238 # We send this one through one forwarding hop.
239 # It starts with one ARC-set.
240 # The reception at the forwarder gets an ARC-fail, because the bodyhash does not
241 # match - so the forwarder outbound ARC-signs as a fail,
242 # and the final receiver evaluates ARC status as fail.
243 # Mail original in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-11#page-14
245 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
249 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
255 Received: from dragon.trusteddomain.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
256 by dragon.trusteddomain.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w121YG2q036577;
257 Thu, 1 Feb 2018 17:34:20 -0800 (PST)
258 (envelope-from arc-discuss-bounces@dmarc.org)
259 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dmarc.org;
260 s=clochette; t=1517535263;
261 bh=DXU/xKzzQYeoYB254nZ0AzNm7z2YZ//FpTnhgIjPyt8=;
262 h=Date:To:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:Subject:List-Id:
263 List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:
265 b=Z66qes0GxyXtv0ow232KSy/b44fPNLZL8JOXHiJLi9dHzIPyxsQd/Zb5NP8i3427g
266 a9tEyo8Rpz8DPbn351e+IlYqRGLfokTWgX+7NfMLy87p3SfnPytUu6PM8QiW2VC889
267 Tk0K+5xH5KSgkENaPdLBigHtunyNZaSofgKy5vBM=
268 Authentication-Results: dragon.trusteddomain.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted) header.sender=arc-discuss-bounces@dmarc.org; spf=fail (NotPermitted) smtp.mfrom=arc-discuss-bounces@dmarc.org
269 Received: from mailhub.convivian.com (mailhub.convivian.com [72.5.31.108])
270 by dragon.trusteddomain.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w121YEt6036571
271 for <arc-discuss@dmarc.org>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 17:34:14 -0800 (PST)
272 (envelope-from jered@convivian.com)
273 Authentication-Results: dragon.trusteddomain.org; dkim=pass
274 reason="1024-bit key"
275 header.d=convivian.com header.i=@convivian.com header.b=LHXEAl5e;
277 Authentication-Results: dragon.trusteddomain.org;
278 sender-id=pass header.from=jered@convivian.com;
279 spf=pass smtp.mfrom=jered@convivian.com
280 Received: from zimbra8.internal.convivian.com (zimbra8.internal.convivian.com
282 by mailhub.convivian.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 471DA66FB6;
283 Thu, 1 Feb 2018 20:34:08 -0500 (EST)
284 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=convivian.com; s=default; t=1517535248; cv=none;
285 b=HkK4AhtPFBUHtRUKKzTON3wyMj7ZLq881P2qhWg+lO8Y50V9SEc8lJ4dBIM3cj3ftfAbooPSLHAVejA89bpS1eAvODci6pOPaQWkBZmpdu+yPIxqX3FyOaCdIaZFbXaMQ1Jg5Sraf5mkCESmfjR5bCguAaZsnPQDF6wSN8VhbQk=
286 ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=convivian.com; s=default;
287 t=1517535248; c=relaxed/simple;
288 bh=9Cp8KoxNPc7FEuC29xB5bNWWadzdEFhXrX/8i+vd3g4=;
289 h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
290 Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Originating-IP:X-Mailer:
291 Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:From;
292 b=jG+KnBrP2oq1z1upStMoWbM1fkS5zbUiir221Gy6h7ao5oy7Qc3m0pXgrSdhgGD4oX/kk2seEt2WAlPNwEsZyvYeG/80ctd/2+hwaVQ6JSOU83Rdd8im8HwMvXzXZIz8ATjPpOv21+xMrqlPSkD/l6X4VP+AAoVVkhW7f4GWcws=
293 ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mailhub.convivian.com; none
294 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=convivian.com;
295 s=default; t=1517535248;
296 bh=9Cp8KoxNPc7FEuC29xB5bNWWadzdEFhXrX/8i+vd3g4=;
297 h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From;
298 b=LHXEAl5elmfkdXNdK24QonXpkiG38neuJoS7fSQXwZVZkR+cdYNr6eBxx3DF4reJO
299 NgzV5GFyPX6+LdIqR6rnC8BXhjvJq+pxLW3/wKx39W3ANYWRFm1dgyWBz99NxNNvk/
300 ruQkYYBBk9GPM52EyHNMvHciRAyaSk+VluGj6c6M=
301 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 20:34:08 -0500 (EST)
302 To: Brandon Long <blong@google.com>
303 Message-ID: <1426665656.110316.1517535248039.JavaMail.zimbra@convivian.com>
304 In-Reply-To: <CABa8R6s3e1k=c9wQBtNBWvPT4BrXv3-2NnynyAfRseZ-5s6NKg@mail.gmail.com>
305 References: <CO2PR0501MB981081FA2C73CB83FA1C903F1FA0@CO2PR0501MB981.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
306 <CAAQnKjAV3zEfP-J6JgTrv1jU9UPmf9dG9SPr-+q4jZ6PaGQjxg@mail.gmail.com>
307 <CAAQnKjBBLS9Lm2vnT3i+WUNhrvv2oDEMFEcyozw+YzyKS4G1qQ@mail.gmail.com>
308 <29030059.107105.1517497494557.JavaMail.zimbra@convivian.com>
309 <4f60039a-a754-ae4c-1543-0a978d9e13be@rolandturner.com>
310 <1544831589.110194.1517532064123.JavaMail.zimbra@convivian.com>
311 <CABa8R6s3e1k=c9wQBtNBWvPT4BrXv3-2NnynyAfRseZ-5s6NKg@mail.gmail.com>
313 X-Originating-IP: [172.16.0.5]
314 X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.7.11_GA_1854 (ZimbraWebClient - FF58 (Mac)/8.7.11_GA_1854)
315 Thread-Topic: Gmail support of ARC headers from third-parties
316 Thread-Index: JantLkX01vLd7pyKcopbBWCs3yDbLQ==
317 Cc: arc-discuss <arc-discuss@dmarc.org>
318 Subject: Re: [arc-discuss] Gmail support of ARC headers from third-parties
319 X-BeenThere: arc-discuss@dmarc.org
320 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
322 List-Id: Discussion of the ARC protocol <arc-discuss.dmarc.org>
323 List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.dmarc.org/mailman/options/arc-discuss>,
324 <mailto:arc-discuss-request@dmarc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
325 List-Archive: <http://lists.dmarc.org/pipermail/arc-discuss/>
326 List-Post: <mailto:arc-discuss@dmarc.org>
327 List-Help: <mailto:arc-discuss-request@dmarc.org?subject=help>
328 List-Subscribe: <http://lists.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/arc-discuss>,
329 <mailto:arc-discuss-request@dmarc.org?subject=subscribe>
330 From: Jered Floyd via arc-discuss <arc-discuss@dmarc.org>
331 Reply-To: Jered Floyd <jered@convivian.com>
332 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2728806607597782871=="
333 Errors-To: arc-discuss-bounces@dmarc.org
334 Sender: "arc-discuss" <arc-discuss-bounces@dmarc.org>
336 --===============2728806607597782871==
337 Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
338 boundary="=_bda8d35f-e3be-4e59-9fc8-f78ed0af3226"
340 --=_bda8d35f-e3be-4e59-9fc8-f78ed0af3226
341 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
342 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
344 >> Couldn't the first untrusted ARC signer (working in reverse chronological order)
345 >> simply have faked all the earlier headers and applied a "valid" ARC
346 >> signature/seal? This is why I figured you must trust the entire chain if you
347 >> want to trust the sender data.
349 > They can't fake an earlier signature unless they have the private key for the
352 > Ie, a non-modifying hop is basically a no-op, unless you want to trust their
355 OK, sure; I agree with that. But I guess I see ARC as primarily for indirect mail flows that break DKIM (i.e. Mailman), in which case I think trust is needed to bridge those hops?
359 --=_bda8d35f-e3be-4e59-9fc8-f78ed0af3226
360 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
361 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
363 <html><body><div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000"><div><br></div><div data-marker="__QUOTED_TEXT__"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
364 Couldn't the first untrusted ARC signer (working in reverse chronological order) simply have faked all the earlier headers and applied a "valid" ARC signature/seal? This is why I figured you must trust the entire chain if you want to trust the sender data.<br></blockquote><br><div>They can't fake an earlier signature unless they have the private key for the signing domain.</div><br><div>Ie, a non-modifying hop is basically a no-op, unless you want to trust their auth results.</div></div></div></blockquote><div>OK, sure; I agree with that. But I guess I see ARC as primarily for indirect mail flows that break DKIM (i.e. Mailman), in which case I think trust is needed to bridge those hops?<br></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>--Jered<br data-mce-bogus="1"></div></div></div></body></html>
365 --=_bda8d35f-e3be-4e59-9fc8-f78ed0af3226--
367 --===============2728806607597782871==
368 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
371 Content-Disposition: inline
373 _______________________________________________
374 arc-discuss mailing list
375 arc-discuss@dmarc.org
376 http://lists.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/arc-discuss
378 --===============2728806607597782871==--
385 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
387 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
391 # Check attemtping to sign, with a missing keyfile
392 # It starts off bare, so the forwarder reception gets an ARC status of "none".
393 # The outbound tries to sign it with that.
395 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
399 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>
414 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -DBAD -q
416 exim -DSERVER=server -DNOTDAEMON -q
428 exim -DSERVER=server -DVALUE=/pass -DINSERT='log_message=ARC-FAIL' -bd -oX PORT_D
431 # We just send this in for reception, bare, to check the "arc" verify can take options
433 client 127.0.0.1 PORT_D
437 MAIL FROM:<CALLER@bloggs.com>