I see you have t=1246689812 specified in your DKIM DNS txt record. That means testing. Remove it and see if you pass.
Main Topics
Browse All TopicsHi,
I an effort to setup a good mail service I have implemented DKIM in addition to spf.
All seemed to work fine but I have some issues with the signature and hope that maybe someone has the same issue and resolved it.
I did make lots of research and several people did indicate they had the issue but for some reason there is no definitive answer that assists me to resolve this on my system.
I run Linux RHEL 5 64bit - Sendmail - DKIM-filter
If I send a email to google it indicates "dkim=neutral (no key) header.i=@dmni.com" I tried hard but I do not understand this. I do have a private and public key and all should be there.
I do start the filter with:
dkim-filter -l -p inet:8891@localhost -b sv -c simple -d dmni.com -k /var/db/domainkeys/mail.ke
the key folder and file us assigned to the user dkim
The dns has the entry:
mail._domainkey.dmni.com. 300 IN TXT v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MHww ... AB
Here is what google says and see below this the test at check-auth@verifier.port25
Delivered-To: thomanji@gmail.com
Received: by 10.220.92.139 with SMTP id r11cs61468vcm;
Fri, 3 Jul 2009 23:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.90.101.7 with SMTP id y7mr775242agb.5.1246689803
Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <thomas@dmni.com>
Received: from app2.dmni.com (app2.dmni.com [174.143.94.154])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 5si10643557gxk.91.2009.07.
Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:43:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of thomas@dmni.com designates 174.143.94.154 as permitted sender) client-ip=174.143.94.154;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of thomas@dmni.com designates 174.143.94.154 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=thomas@dmni.com;
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([120.138.81.35])
(authenticated bits=0)
by app2.dmni.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n646hTG4028468
for <thomanji@gmail.com>; Sat, 4 Jul 2009 02:43:31 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dmni.com; s=mail;
t=1246689812; bh=VYvGzrJLAW0zN632OqvdJBG
h=Message-ID:Date:From:Rep
Content-Type:Content-Trans
b=oidJm99ubX8ljlG2e+Sla9IP
SRuzSUl+Y98RpeRFQYwM2iEu7N
Message-ID: <4A4EFA05.9020904@dmni.com
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:43:17 +0800
From: Thomas Bernthaler <thomas@dmni.com>
Reply-To: thomas@dmni.com
Organization: DMNI
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: thomanji@gmail.com
Subject: test new
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
check-auth@verifier.port25
==========================
Summary of Results
==========================
SPF check: pass
DomainKeys check: neutral
DKIM check: pass
Sender-ID check: pass
SpamAssassin check: ham
==========================
Details:
==========================
HELO hostname: app2.dmni.com
Source IP: 174.143.94.154
mail-from: thomas@dmni.com
--------------------------
SPF check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass
ID(s) verified: smtp.mail=thomas@dmni.com
DNS record(s):
dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:174.143.94.154 a:n2b.bullet.mail.aue.yaho
--------------------------
DomainKeys check details:
--------------------------
Result: neutral (message not signed)
ID(s) verified: header.From=thomas@dmni.co
DNS record(s):
--------------------------
DKIM check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass (matches From: thomas@dmni.com)
ID(s) verified: header.d=dmni.com
Canonicalized Headers:
Message-ID:'20'<4A5171B8.7
Date:'20'Mon,'20'06'20'Jul
From:'20'Thomas'20'Berntha
Reply-To:'20'thomas@dmni.c
MIME-Version:'20'1.0'0D''0
To:'20'check-auth@verifier
Subject:'20'test'0D''0A'
Content-Type:'20'text/plai
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
DKIM-Signature:'20'v=1;'20
'09't=1246851522;'20'bh=ei
'09'h=Message-ID:Date:From
'09''20'Content-Type:Conte
'09'b=
Canonicalized Body:
This'20'is'20'a'20'DKIM'20
DNS record(s):
mail._domainkey.dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MHwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAD
NOTE: DKIM checking has been performed based on the latest DKIM specs
(RFC 4871 or draft-ietf-dkim-base-10) and verification may fail for
older versions. If you are using Port25's PowerMTA, you need to use
version 3.2r11 or later to get a compatible version of DKIM.
--------------------------
Sender-ID check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass
ID(s) verified: header.From=thomas@dmni.co
DNS record(s):
dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:174.143.94.154 -all"
Did anyone actually resolve this and can let me know what i do wrong. I am on this much to long and have reached the end of my ideas what else to do to get this done.
Thank you all for the assistance.
Best wishes,
Thom
This Question has been solved and asker verified All Experts Exchange premium technology solutions are available to subscription members.
Experts Exchange has been collecting answers to technology questions since 1996…3 million and counting! If you have a question, chances are we already have your answer.
If you can't find the exact answer you're looking for, ask our exclusive community of 50,000 experts. You’ll get a personalized answer from a trusted professional.
Thousands of free tech tips, tricks, how-to’s and tutorials are available in our peer reviewed articles section. See for yourself how smart our experts are, no login required.
Access the answers to your technology questions today.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Members of the expert community talk about why the experience at Experts Exchange is different than what you will find anywhere else.

Try it out and discover for yourself.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Join the community of experts here and help other tech pros by answering question in your area of expertise. You can earn FREE access to all Experts Exchange's premium features and resources.
Hi Rackaid2,
Thank you very much for your answer.
However i do have in my DNS record the following:
mail._domainkey.dmni.com. 300 IN TXT v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MHww ... AB
No T, but now that you mentioned this I see that in google it has this in. I guess not I have another issues that does not make sense to me.
Also further down where you see the test with check-auth@verifier.port25
DKIM-Signature:'20'v=1;'20
'09't=1246851522;'20'bh=ei
'09'h=Message-ID:Date:From
'09''20'Content-Type:Conte
'09'b=
which is the actual key and it does not have the test tag in there.
Best wishes,
Thom
Hi,
After some research I was told that this t= is added by google. However this still does not explain the test I get back.
It says in all DKIM tests "DomainKeys check: neutral (message not signed)"
Here is the port25.com report:
This message is an automatic response from Port25's authentication verifier
service at verifier.port25.com. The service allows email senders to perform
a simple check of various sender authentication mechanisms. It is provided
free of charge, in the hope that it is useful to the email community. While
it is not officially supported, we welcome any feedback you may have at
<verifier-feedback@port25.c
Thank you for using the verifier,
The Port25 Solutions, Inc. team
==========================
Summary of Results
==========================
SPF check: pass
DomainKeys check: neutral
DKIM check: pass
Sender-ID check: pass
SpamAssassin check: ham
==========================
Details:
==========================
HELO hostname: app2.dmni.com
Source IP: 174.143.94.154
mail-from: thomas@dmni.com
--------------------------
SPF check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass
ID(s) verified: smtp.mail=thomas@dmni.com
DNS record(s):
dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:174.143.94.154 a:n2b.bullet.mail.aue.yaho
--------------------------
DomainKeys check details:
--------------------------
Result: neutral (message not signed)
ID(s) verified: header.From=thomas@dmni.co
DNS record(s):
--------------------------
DKIM check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass (matches From: thomas@dmni.com)
ID(s) verified: header.d=dmni.com
Canonicalized Headers:
Message-ID:'20'<4A5B300B.40
Date:'20'Mon,'20'13'20'Jul
From:'20'Thomas'20'Berntha
Reply-To:'20'thomas@dmni.c
MIME-Version:'20'1.0'0D''0
To:'20'check-auth@verifier
Subject:'20'test'0D''0A'
Content-Type:'20'text/plai
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
DKIM-Signature:'20'v=1;'20
'09't=1247490066;'20'bh=JE
'09'h=Message-ID:Date:From
'09''20'Content-Type:Conte
'09'b=
Canonicalized Body:
test'0D''0A'
'0D''0A'
--'20''0D''0A'
__________________________
'20''20''20''20''20''20''2
--------------------------
'20''20''20''20''20''20''2
E-Mail:'20'thomas@dmni.com
__________________________
DNS record(s):
mail._domainkey.dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=DKIM1; g=*; k=rsa; p=MHwwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAD
NOTE: DKIM checking has been performed based on the latest DKIM specs
(RFC 4871 or draft-ietf-dkim-base-10) and verification may fail for
older versions. If you are using Port25's PowerMTA, you need to use
version 3.2r11 or later to get a compatible version of DKIM.
--------------------------
Sender-ID check details:
--------------------------
Result: pass
ID(s) verified: header.From=thomas@dmni.co
DNS record(s):
dmni.com. 300 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:174.143.94.154 a:n2b.bullet.mail.aue.yaho
--------------------------
SpamAssassin check details:
--------------------------
SpamAssassin v3.2.5 (2008-06-10)
Result: ham (-0.2 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
2.2 TVD_SPACE_RATIO BODY: TVD_SPACE_RATIO
0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server
[120.138.81.35 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
-0.4 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
==========================
Explanation of the possible results (adapted from
draft-kucherawy-sender-aut
==========================
"pass"
the message passed the authentication test.
"fail"
the message failed the authentication test.
"softfail"
the message failed the authentication test, and the authentication
method has either an explicit or implicit policy which doesn't require
successful authentication of all messages from that domain.
"neutral"
the authentication method completed without errors, but was unable
to reach either a positive or a negative result about the message.
"temperror"
a temporary (recoverable) error occurred attempting to authenticate
the sender; either the process couldn't be completed locally, or
there was a temporary failure retrieving data required for the
authentication. A later retry may produce a more final result.
"permerror"
a permanent (unrecoverable) error occurred attempting to
authenticate the sender; either the process couldn't be completed
locally, or there was a permanent failure retrieving data required
for the authentication.
==========================
Original Email
==========================
Return-Path: <thomas@dmni.com>
Received: from app2.dmni.com (174.143.94.154) by verifier.port25.com (PowerMTA(TM) v3.6a1) id hbcnak0hse8k for <check-auth@verifier.port25
Authentication-Results: verifier.port25.com smtp.mail=thomas@dmni.com;
Authentication-Results: verifier.port25.com header.From=thomas@dmni.co
Authentication-Results: verifier.port25.com header.d=dmni.com; dkim=pass (matches From: thomas@dmni.com);
Authentication-Results: verifier.port25.com header.From=thomas@dmni.co
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([120.138.81.35])
(authenticated bits=0)
by app2.dmni.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6DD13Qg008038
for <check-auth@verifier.port25
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dmni.com; s=mail;
t=1247490066; bh=JE9Gfi39GhBk165qkC2jLAl
h=Message-ID:Date:From:Rep
Content-Type:Content-Trans
b=d668xqR0fnl3kjXPMHzMqNS/
93kyqRVsZ7v5Sal8pBGkhlH1Er
Message-ID: <4A5B300B.40107@dmni.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:00:59 +0800
From: Thomas Bernthaler <thomas@dmni.com>
Reply-To: thomas@dmni.com
Organization: DMNI
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: check-auth@verifier.port25
Subject: test
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
Business Accounts
Answer for Membership
by: ThomanjiPosted on 2009-07-07 at 21:21:42ID: 24800535
Hi,
Thank you very much, I appreciate the assistance.
I understand that this is a very specific issue and maybe not many people use DKIM at this time.
Lets see if anyone can help.
All the best,
thomas