linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v5 0/3] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220523152516.7sr247i3bzwhr44w@quack3.lan>
Date:   Mon, 23 May 2022 17:25:16 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
        paolo.valente@...aro.org, tj@...nel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v5 0/3] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a
 specail occasion

On Mon 23-05-22 06:36:58, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 5/23/22 2:59 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Mon 23-05-22 09:10:38, yukuai (C) wrote:
> >> ? 2022/05/21 20:21, Jens Axboe ??:
> >>> On 5/21/22 1:22 AM, yukuai (C) wrote:
> >>>> ? 2022/05/14 17:29, yukuai (C) ??:
> >>>>> ? 2022/05/05 9:00, yukuai (C) ??:
> >>>>>> Hi, Paolo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Can you take a look at this patchset? It has been quite a long time
> >>>>>> since we spotted this problem...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> friendly ping ...
> >>>> friendly ping ...
> >>>
> >>> I can't speak for Paolo, but I've mentioned before that the majority
> >>> of your messages end up in my spam. That's still the case, in fact
> >>> I just marked maybe 10 of them as not spam.
> >>>
> >>> You really need to get this issued sorted out, or you will continue
> >>> to have patches ignore because folks may simply not see them.
> >>>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks for your notice.
> >>
> >> Is it just me or do you see someone else's messages from *huawei.com
> >> end up in spam? I tried to seek help from our IT support, however, they
> >> didn't find anything unusual...
> > 
> > So actually I have noticed that a lot of (valid) email from huawei.com (not
> > just you) ends up in the spam mailbox. For me direct messages usually pass
> > (likely matching SPF records for originating mail server save the email
> > from going to spam) but messages going through mailing lists are flagged as
> > spam because the emails are missing valid DKIM signature but huawei.com
> > DMARC config says there should be DKIM signature (even direct messages are
> > missing DKIM so this does not seem as a mailing list configuration issue).
> > So this seems as some misconfiguration of the mails on huawei.com side
> > (likely missing DKIM signing of outgoing email).
> 
> SPF/DKIM was indeed a problem earlier for yukaui patches, but I don't
> see that anymore. Maybe it's still an issue for some emails, from them
> or Huawei in general?

Hum, for me all emails from Huawei I've received even today fail the DKIM
check. After some more digging there is interesting inconsistency in DMARC
configuration for huawei.com domain. There is DMARC record for huawei.com
like:

huawei.com.		600	IN	TXT	"v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc@....huawei.com"

which means no DKIM is required but _dmarc.huawei.com has:

_dmarc.huawei.com.	600	IN	TXT	"v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;ruf=mailto:dmarc@...wei.com;rua=mailto:dmarc@...wei.com"

which says that DKIM is required. I guess this inconsistency may be the
reason why there are problems with DKIM validation for senders from
huawei.com. Yu Kuai, can you perhaps take this to your IT support to fix
this? Either make sure huawei.com emails get properly signed with DKIM or
remove the 'quarantine' record from _dmarc.huawei.com. Thanks!

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR