Heho,
I looked at that recently; See the SMTP paper recently published [1], and
enforcing TLS certainly is indeed on the rise, and at least one of the privacy
mail providers at least allowed their users to opt-in to TLS-Only sending for
their mails.
We are currently also setting up a website to
Dňa 22. novembra 2022 21:00:36 UTC používateľ "Gellner, Oliver via mailop"
napísal:
>Also the number of MTAs that require STARTTLS is not increasing based on my
>experIence. I haven’t seen a large ESP which enforced TLS for all incoming and
>outgoing connections yet.
Are you aware that even c
Dňa 22. novembra 2022 22:27:13 UTC používateľ Sebastian Nielsen via mailop
napísal:
>
>>>that trigger take over domain in from: header so its basicly not origin
>>>poster any more, but it pass dmarc, lol :)
>
>Yes it pass DMARC because the MIME From: domain is rewritten to
>mailop@mailop.org
>H
>>that trigger take over domain in from: header so its basicly not origin
>>poster any more, but it pass dmarc, lol :)
Yes it pass DMARC because the MIME From: domain is rewritten to
mailop@mailop.org
Having spurious signatures that don't validate fully, is OK (and some DKIM
tools may report a
> On 21.11.2022 at 15:05 Slavko via mailop wrote:
>
> To make **everyone** happy with your certificate/TLS, you have to ensure
> all possible combinations:
>
> + valid certificate chain (for those requiring it)
> + valid SAN name (for those requiring it)
> + valid DANE TLSA record (for those req
Alessandro Vesely via mailop skrev den 2022-11-22 10:54:
On Tue 22/Nov/2022 09:55:17 +0100 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote:
The message you wrote had:
Return-Path:
Authentication-Results: wmail.tana.it;
spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailop.org;
dkim=fail (signature verification failed) heade
All
soft_bounce is now set to 'no'.
Graeme
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
I would block the recipient domains at the MTA level and cut out the IP
rate limiting for a while. An MTA should be able to handle the rejection
for the domain fine. I do the same with exim when a user tries to give
me the job of mass forwarding bounces, I just won't do it. In my mind a
flood o
Delayed bounce.. hehehe.. It's called 'backscatter', no matter what the
source is..
And Outlook should not be doing that, but it does in very specific
cases. Of course, the problem is you customer ultimately, but
backscatter is bad, and that issue you can and should bring up with Outlook.
B
On 2022-11-22 at 05:54:21 UTC-0500 (Tue, 22 Nov 2022 11:54:21 +0100)
Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop
is rumored to have said:
Hi!
I would appreciate your help on a bad issue we are having.
We are facing a very large amount of connections from Outlook, in the
order
of 50k connections per minute (
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 2:00 PM Taejoong (tijay) Chung via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> The Sender Policy Framework (SPF) is an easy way to check whether the
> sender is authorized to send emails – however, it may cause some security
> holes if it causes too many DNS lookups
> On 22 Nov 2022, at 11:39, Peter N. M. Hansteen via mailop
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:54:21AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:
>> I mean, to have 50k connections per minute to deliver bounce reports means
>> that the running campaign must be in the order of millions of e
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:54:21AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:
> I mean, to have 50k connections per minute to deliver bounce reports means
> that the running campaign must be in the order of millions of emails just
> for Outlook!
50k bounces per minute is abnormal, that's for sure.
Hi!
I would appreciate your help on a bad issue we are having.
We are facing a very large amount of connections from Outlook, in the order
of 50k connections per minute (whereas the second "most active" server is
at 100).
Upon investigation, we discovered that one of our users is a mass-sending
Morning
Just to be clear: we will only be changing the soft_bounce setting at this time.
Even if all the suggestions being made were implemented, some list subscribers
would *still* have problems receiving list mail and would reject it. It is
incumbent on all members of the list to ensure that
On Tue 22/Nov/2022 09:55:17 +0100 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote:
I think its not technically possible due to the way mailman works with mass
emails. What I know, mailman will consolidate emails going to the same domain,
so if you have like 500 receivers at a@gmail.com ---
z...
On Tue 22/Nov/2022 02:17:14 +0100 L. Mark Stone via mailop wrote:
IMHO, asking me to grant rights before I know to what it is that I am granting
rights is, at best, not nice.
What right(s) did you (omit to) grant?
The first page questions were about consent to participate and understanding
t
I think its not technically possible due to the way mailman works with mass
emails. What I know, mailman will consolidate emails going to the same domain,
so if you have like 500 receivers at a@gmail.com ---
z...@gmail.com mailman will just fire off multiple RCPT TO and then
sen
On Mon 21/Nov/2022 16:22:28 +0100 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote:
Very important that you keep the MIME From: and MAIL FROM: rewrite to
mailop@mailop.org if you are going to implement this change, so you don't trip
sender domain, antispoofing, TLD banlists, DKIM, SPF or DMARC filters.
It
19 matches
Mail list logo
