It seems Gandi has been hiking their prices rather significantly.
Do you have recommendations for a good domain registrar which still
keeps prices at a reasonable level, and also isn't a problematic
spammer/scammer haven?
The latter criteria removes at least OVH, and perhaps also Joker,
or are t
This week, we've been getting quite a lot of carefully forged spam from
outlook.com addressess, fully using their email infrastructure.
What is your experience, is there point in putting effort into reporting it?
Received: from smtp1.csc.fi (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by loc
Can someone shed light on a Microsoft/Outlook block list? Our hobby server
(on upcloud.com) seem to have been blocked for quite some time now.
At this time, SPF and DKIM should be correct for our outgoing messages.
Is there anything to be done, apart from switching to some mail sender
company ins
On 10/11/23 12:12, Andreas via mailop wrote:
since a few hours we have problems with sending to Microsoft. We get
hundreds of messages like in the subject with the reference to
S77719. Also colleagues from other companies in germany are seeing
the same in their logs. All mails that are blocked h
On 8/8/23 18:44, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
Does anyone have *any* contact at OVH? Reports to abuse@, and
through the abuse page, have yielded nothing for this very
unrepentant spammer. :-(
Unless the situation has dramatically changed in the last year,
OVH has no functioning abuse team.
On 8/7/23 03:06, Al Iverson via mailop wrote:
If MS is using IPv6 to send the mail to Google, you might be in an
extra difficult spot. Not everybody agrees/believes this, but in my
experience Gmail is more quick to block IPv6-sent mail; they're more
stringent about what they might let through ve
On 25/10/2022 17.40, Frank Bulk via mailop wrote:
We had it last night, too, but this morning seeing it again for hotmail.com,
outlook.com, and live.com:
Same here, with also the country-specific hotmail/live domains
and msn.com (hardly surprisingly, as they are on the same servers).
My tempor
On 13/09/2022 02.44, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
Most of the major mailbox providers do have other feedback loops,
many based on ARF, that can be used for this...
Has anyone put together a good summary of available feedback loops,
specially from big players?
--
/* * * Otto J. Makela * *
On 08/06/2022 21.25, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
so the false positive rate for the new rule is better. It doesn't
even need to be a new rule, maybe your reputation just decreased
slightly and it now is below the threshold.
I know of a couple of similar cases -- to me it seems Google's Bay
On 05/11/2021 16.18, Marcel Becker via mailop wrote:
Now it's quite possible that other contact sources you have
configured on our Mac are in fact doing what you are describing. (ie
If you have Google Contacts configured and Google might be doing
interesting things). Also note that Apple Contact
This is kinda peripherally connected to mail system operations, but probably
still interesting. I've opened a feedback ticket to Apple about the address
collecting behavior of the MacOS Contacts application, that causes issues
through interaction with their other products Mac Mail and Calendar.
C
We're currently running Roaring Penguin CanIT as our mail frontend,
and have been given an end-of-life notice from the new owners:
https://go.zixcorp.com/index.php/email/emailWebview?md_id=21715
So, now we're looking for a good frontend with antispam functions.
CanIT is a set of open source softw
On 14/10/2021 17.31, Al Iverson wrote:
> Otto! Long time no talk. Hope you're doing well. :)
>
> If it's any consolation, Gmail thinks that your post to Mailop is a
> phish, so perhaps the bad domain made it to the Google Safe Browsing
> blacklist, at least. :)
Interestingly enough, I sent the m
We received some phising emails, and when you access the phishing
site redirector
hxxps://googleweblight.com/i?u=sso-webmailsrvr-s334bggbh.pages.dev?user=em...@example.com
you will be redirected to a website using such a long URL (about 15k)
that when you try to report it to Firefox Phishing Prot
On 02/03/2021 18.28, John R Levine via mailop wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2021, Otto J. Makela wrote:
>> I read this as meaning most implementations will let you only have
>> two NOERRORs, and then it's game over. As I said, I doubt SPF was
>> intended to cause this side effect.
>
> Hm, missed that, it
On 02/03/2021 10.28, Otto J. Makela via mailop wrote:
> Unfortunately, RFC 7208 section 4.6.4 DNS Lookup limits also states:
>
>As described at the end of Section 11.1, there may be cases where it
>is useful to limit the number of "terms" for which DNS querie
On 01/03/2021 18.41, John Levine wrote:
> In article <8a937890-bfd7-8ee9-3818-063c12d68...@iki.fi> you write:
>> } until match IP address connecting us or error count exceeded
>>
>> which means the error count very easily gets exceeded if your
>> email server uses IPv6 and few (or none) of the
Due to never actually reading the sources, and a careless browsing
of the SPF specs, I always assumed the algorithm was something like:
retrieve email sender
retrieve IP address used to connect to us
retrieve & parse appropriate SPF txt record from DNS
repeat for ea
On 27/10/2020 09.54, Otto J. Makela via mailop wrote:
> On 23/10/2020 23.42, John Levine wrote:
>> In article you write:
>>> When sending messages to a *.mail.protection.outlook.com host via IPv6,
>>> our mail host gets the following email status:
>>>
>>&
On 23/10/2020 23.42, John Levine wrote:
> In article you write:
>> When sending messages to a *.mail.protection.outlook.com host via IPv6,
>> our mail host gets the following email status:
>>
>> #4.7.26 SMTP; 450 4.7.26 Service does not accept messages sent over IPv6
>> [2001:708:10:6004::22] unle
We have a customer (Finnish Academy aka.fi) who use our services to send out
emails through our server smtp.sdn.csc.fi. Unfortunately, Outlook.com seems to
have added more hoops for us to jump through.
When sending messages to a *.mail.protection.outlook.com host via IPv6,
our mail host gets the f
On 21/05/2019 12.37, Otto J. Makela via mailop wrote:
> Is there any point in receiving any email from any OVH space,
> since discussions on this list would seem to indicate they have
> no functioning abuse enforcement?
>
> Numerous netblocks registered to them [...]
> se
Is there any point in receiving any email from any OVH space,
since discussions on this list would seem to indicate they have
no functioning abuse enforcement?
Numerous netblocks registered to them like 51.77.44.64-51.77.44.127
described as "Failover IPs / Legacy" seem to be permanent spammer have
23 matches
Mail list logo
