Can MailScanner do dkim/dk-milter?

Kai Wang kwang at
Fri Oct 13 18:41:46 IST 2006

The reason,  which I wanted to sign the outgoing message by MailScanner, 
is because MailScanner add additional header lines and I want to sign it 
after MailScanner processing and I know MailScanner allows you to add 
customized functions, which important for debugging. Postfix's milter 
does not give much error log which makes my life quite difficult  and 
the documentation is not adequate.

I know there are DK and DKIM options and have not decided which one to 
go. The link you showed me actually have different opinion of which one 
is better over the other.

"At the time of this writing it appears the /dkim-milter/ is more 
reliable and better maintained than /dk-milter/, which is slowly fading 
into oblivion. Similar holds true in the world of Perl modules: there 
are modules /Mail::DomainKeys/ and /Mail::DKIM/, both of which can be 
used by SpamAssassin. Again the /Mail::DKIM/ (by Jason Long and Anthony 
D. Urso) seems to be of higher quality than the older 
/Mail::DomainKeys/. SpamAssassin makes it very easy to use each or both 
of them (for verification only), just by enabling the already provided 

Despite DomainKeys slowly giving grounds to DKIM, the DomainKeys is 
currently still in use by several large players in the Internet world, 
so this section will describe how to integrate both of them with Postfix 
and amavisd-new (an after-queue content filter) into a mail system."

Thanks for the advice.

Dhawal Doshy wrote:
> Kai Wang wrote:
>> Greetings.
>> We run authenticated postfix+Mailscanner. I want to sign our out 
>> going messages. Because we enforced authentication. I don't want to 
>> run SpamAssassin. Is there a way to let MailScanner call dkim/dk-milter?
> SpamAssasin can only verify (and not sign) DK/DKIM, so that is not an 
> option. For outgoing messages, you'll have to write a custom function 
> and call it via the 'Sign clean messages' in MailScanner.conf
> The other option is doing it at the postfix level, see:
> In any case, the important point to remember is that DKIM adoption is 
> not as widespread as the DK adoption yet! (though it is happening 
> gradually).. and you'll be better off implementing both till DK is 
> completely phased out..
> - dhawal

Kai Wang
System Services
Information Technologies, University of Calgary,
2500 University Drive, N.W.,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4
Phone (403) 220-2423, Fax (403) 282-9361

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list