Re: Linux 5.18-rc1

From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@kernel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.18-rc1
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:45:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea840ab9-0c20-8c06-f7d4-bb9642a63500@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=witgMUS8To6wijxdbQ+QEH0gcHSYV6Y=yzOdb=Q4h9PJA@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/4/22 08:32, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 9:23 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>
>> Oops. Sorry, I thought it was big endian. No idea why. I'll update
>> subject and description and resend.
> 
> I see your updated patch, but for some reason 'b4' is unhappy about it, with
> 
>    $ b4 am 20220404134338.3276991-1-linux@roeck-us.net
> 
> causing
> 
>    ✗ [PATCH v3] staging: r8188eu: Fix PPPoE tag insertion on little
> endian systems
>    ---
>    ✗ BADSIG: DKIM/roeck-us.net
> 
> your DKIM looks fine on the messages I see, but now that I look at it
> on the mailing list, I notice that your DKIM really is very wrong, and
> has a lot of headers that a DKIM signature should *not* have.
> 
> Your DKIM signature includes header names that are very much for list
> management, so by definition DKIM will fail for any email you send
> through a mailing list. Headers like
> "Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc
> :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe" etc.
> 
> The DKIM setup should protect the meaningful headers that matter to
> the sender, not things that the mail system will validly add when it
> passes through.
> 
> So the DKIM header list should be things like
> ":To:From:Cc:Message-Id:Date:Subject:"
> 
> Not things like "Sender" or mailing list things.

I tried to tell my provider, but to no avail. Until now I used gmail,
but gmail will disable that ability by end of this month, leaving me
in the dark. Lose-lose situation for me. Right now I don't have a
useful alternative that doesn't require me to change my e-mail
address completely (or setting up my own e-mail server which
is a pita).

> 
> Anyway, I was going to just commit it directly, but with the DKIM
> verification failing, I was a bit less eager to. And then I noticed
> that you used "be16_to_cpu()" - which is technically correct - which
> doesn't match the other code in that file.
> 
Another lose-lose situation. Larry tells me I should use
be16_to_cpu(), you tell me I should not.

Either case, https://lore.kernel.org/r/YkPK/QmLAp3BkygY@sckzor-linux.localdomain
is a more complete solution, so you might want to pick that one.

Thanks,
Guenter