Re: Linux 5.18-rc1

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 08:32:16AM -0700, 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.
> 
> 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.

I've taken this in my tree now and will get it to you for -rc2 if you
don't want to take it.  And yes, I see the dkim issue as well, I haven't
started complaining about to people yet as lots of people have problem
email setups.  Should we start pushing back?

thanks,

greg k-h