Re: [mailop] Outlook.com: intermittent DKIM failures

On 18/06/2025 09:49, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote: Muthulakshmanan, Thiyagarajan skrev den 2025-06-18 10:39: Mostly sounds like Microsoft rolled out some change during that time and did not implement DKIM fail or DMARC align check properly. microsoft should not reject based on spf, dkim t

Re: [mailop] Weird junk emails via Google Groups

On 05/06/2025 12:33, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: Why the hell does Google make possible to add someone to a Google group without sending a confirmation request, or at least a notification, to the recipient in question??? Indeed And the emails contain a list-unsubscribe URL - but it doesn'

[mailop] Weird junk emails via Google Groups

We're getting loads of "acknowledgement" emails from numerous legitimate helpdesk systems coming to us, from emails that we didn't send. Analyzing the headers, it appears that the helpdesks are sending automated messages to email addresses which are going to Google Groups, which, somehow, have

Re: [mailop] Mandated Email Terms of Service (ToS) announcement

On 30/01/2025 07:20, Scott Q. via mailop wrote: Don't you think that democracy itself has its own weaknesses ? A benevolent ruler can be much more efficient than what we have now in much of the world, including democracies. There have been some cases in history where societies advanced by leaps

Re: [mailop] Outlook IMAP implementation

On 27 October 2024 18:51:49 "Scott Q. via mailop" wrote: Or bad engineering. Or intentionally sabotage the IMAP experience, because it's a really bad experience with this behavior It wouldn't surprise me if it was the former but cynical me suspects the latter (or at least the former, with no

Re: [mailop] Outlook IMAP implementation

On 27/10/2024 09:40, Scott Q. via mailop wrote: Has anyone else noticed that Outlook doesn't seem to make use of (UID) COPY commands in IMAP ? When you copy/move messages it downloads them and appends them instead which makes the entire process quite slow. Usually when it does that it also seem

Re: [mailop] SPF fragility vs. utility

On 18/10/2024 15:00, Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop wrote: Am 18.10.24 um 15:16 schrieb Paul Smith* via mailop: A spammer can send SPF-authenticated mail 'From: "b...@microsoft.com" ', but any spam filtering knows that it's not really from Microsoft. What they

Re: [mailop] SPF fragility vs. utility

On 18/10/2024 13:09, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: Dnia 18.10.2024 o godz. 10:20:46 Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop pisze: In any case, spammers aren't dumb, and they can set up perfectly valid SPF and DKIM for their domains conveniently hidden behind That's the most important point against SPF

Re: [mailop] Mailserver accepts ssl/tls only

On 18/07/2024 13:36, Jeff Pang via mailop wrote: Can I setup mailserver to accept messages via sdl/tls only from other MTA? How to disable peer MTA send me plaintext mail? You can certainly do that. But don't be surprised if some other mail servers can't send mail to you. Why would you want

Re: [mailop] Why an SPF hard bounce on ~all ?

That would be an SPF fail, but the sender domains are ~all Why the hard bounce? It's entirely up to the receiver what they do with a message. If they've decided to hard fail messages with soft SPF fails, that's their choice... ___ mailop mailing

Re: [mailop] DKIM / slippery slope gmx.de

On 18/12/2023 10:18, ml+mailop--- via mailop wrote: And it seems none of the extra requirements do anything against spam, because the spammers can (and do, see above) easily implement all of those. DKIM (and SPF) aren't anti-spam measures, and have never been promoted as such. They're anti-for

Re: [mailop] outlook.com 421 try again later S77719

On 11/10/2023 10:12, 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 blo

Re: [mailop] outlook.com 421 try again later S77719

On 11/10/2023 10:48, Urban Loesch via mailop wrote: Hi, same here in north Italy. Also users on Reddit encounter the same: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1755npg/anyone_else_seeing_outlook_mail_delivery_problems/ That points to an issue in the M365 admin -> Healt -> service statu

Re: [mailop] Guide for setting up a mail server ?

On 14 July 2023 18:24:45 Dave Crocker via mailop wrote: We need to 'encourage' people to run their own mail servers, not scare them away.. We also need to encourage people to do all the servicing for their car, to build their own house, and to grow their own food. Or we might take a somewha

Re: [mailop] IP to country?

Try https://dev.maxmind.com/geoip/geolite2-free-geolocation-data On 24 April 2023 16:54:33 Mary via mailop wrote: Hello, Is there a place that provides IP to country location information for free? Preferably in CIDR format. I am not interested to query a service, I am interested to block w

Re: [mailop] How do I break Gmail forwarding?

s://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news &a

Re: [mailop] Reject vs spam folders

; PCs. Unfortunately, there is no good answer that will apply to all users, giving a user various choices is the best we can do. Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___

Re: [mailop] Reject vs spam folders

again. We hope your requirements weren't urgent. Have a nice day!" Which do you think users would prefer? Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] The oligopoly has won.

7;s a legitimate message in there. If the messages were delivered to my Inbox, then it'd take a lot longer than that Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe __

Re: [mailop] Disabling TLS 1.0 and 1.1 for MTA to MTA communication

tacks against TLS1.0 work using HTTP. I am not aware of any viable attack method which can be made using SMTP Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe

Re: [mailop] Interesting question from a team member, MX chaining, list-manage.com

l.admin.mailchimp.com' having an MX record is fine, it means that mail to 'b...@mail.admin.mailchimp.com' has somewhere to go. But it doesn't mean that mail to 'b...@list-manage.com' has anywhere to go. You can't chain MX records like that. Paul -- Paul

Re: [mailop] Understanding specific issue with from header field in google bounce reply

op@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Who Do You Recommend for Small Business Regular (Non-Bulk) Email?

from them. They do expect it from smaller companies, even though they're not paying much more. I expect many of the smaller email providers are in the same boat. Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & up

Re: [mailop] Feasibility of a private DNSBL

e DNSBL called hegr27dm31.myspamblock.com' (where 'hegr27dm31' is the 'secret key') -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for ne

Re: [mailop] SMTP AUTH harassment

ings like auth abuse here, so you can see if IP addresses you're getting attacked by are attacking others. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at

Re: [mailop] Help debugging an outlook.com reject

e very low volume, that could trigger blocking. I don't know what the text is, but could you make it more personalised, so the recipient can be more certain it's not phishing? -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services

Re: [mailop] paypal.com issues

h4._spf.paypal.com include:3ph5._spf.paypal.com ~all" paypal.com. 3548    IN  TXT "v=spf1 include:aspmx.pardot.com ~all" paypal.com. 3548    IN  TXT "workplace-domain-verification=F7ezsH9uapvYDGd2VtPARy1qq9ymN6" . but now ther

Re: [mailop] Greylisting never passing on retry

lay for that message. Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Weird 'tempfail too many recipients' bug/incompatibility EXIM => Postfix?

On 04/02/2021 14:57, Paul Gregg via mailop wrote: On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:03:45PM +, Paul Smith via mailop wrote: On 04/02/2021 11:39, Paul Gregg via mailop wrote: It sounds like you are using PIPELINING when the remote doesn't support it (properly). See if you can turn off pipel

Re: [mailop] Weird 'tempfail too many recipients' bug/incompatibility EXIM => Postfix?

Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.

Re: [mailop] Weird 'tempfail too many recipients' bug/incompatibility EXIM => Postfix?

ponse for each RCPT command in that case) - eg in Postfix's main.cf, I think this should work: smtpd_discard_ehlo_keywords = pipelining Or, if you're running the exim server, you could see if there's a way of disabling pipelining in that to see if that fixes it as well. -- Pa

Re: [mailop] RFCs on quoted pairs in From:?

just tested it here, with a message header like: From: "Joe " Subject: test and Thunderbird tries to reply to b...@example.com. That is totally wrong! It's a bug and needs reporting. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer

Re: [mailop] Weird 'tempfail too many recipients' bug/incompatibility EXIM => Postfix?

Exim end to see what it is really receiving. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe __

Re: [mailop] Is it something to worry about?

eputation (as they need to if trying to send email) -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___

Re: [mailop] Is it something to worry about?

y that cares about abuse, so isn't in L2/L3) I wouldn't block outright based on just an L2/L3 listing, but it does give a leg-up to the spam scoring. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 V

Re: [mailop] What's the point of secondary MX servers?

ly. With MX records, there's precedence, and there's a requirement for the client to try all available servers - that doesn't exist with HTTP. Also, you don't have sessions that last more than one connection in SMTP, whereas you do in HTTP(S). -- Paul Paul Smith C

Re: [mailop] What's the point of secondary MX servers?

lower one when the higher one doesn't respond. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolisting -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & update

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: What's the point of secondary MX servers?

e MX records *OR* multihoming (multiple A records) -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe___

Re: [mailop] Effeciveness (or not) of SPF

checked bank details offline, but lots of people don't realise that email addresses can be forged so easily; anything that makes it harder is a good thing. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No:

Re: [mailop] Effeciveness (or not) of SPF

IP checking way, but would require a new standard) -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe _

Re: [mailop] Effeciveness (or not) of SPF

t it shouldn't do and which do send forged mails) -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe __

Re: [mailop] Deutsche Telekom rejects connections because of missing "provider identification"

t doesn't apply to non-business emails. They do need to put contact details on their website, but do not need to put a 'registered address' or anything like that in their emails as people from registered companies do. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 8

Re: [mailop] Deutsche Telekom rejects connections because of missing "provider identification"

an send from this domain'. If the server can send from *any* domain, then it's a useless policy, as well as being unscalable. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign

Re: [mailop] Deutsche Telekom rejects connections because of missing "provider identification"

a domain. Maybe they could call it something fancy like 'Sender Policy Framework' or something?.. -- Paul Paul Smith Computer Services supp...@pscs.co.uk - 01484 855800 -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http:

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Block list (S3150)

ems are a bit dodgy/arbitrary/random and don't want to risk all the problems being discovered? -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe __

Re: [mailop] UCEPROTECT-Level1 listing

st the 48 hours prior to their timestamp. How do you know no mail was sent from that IP address? Was the IP address blocked at your firewall, or could a different PC or some software have sent that mail without you being aware of it? -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484

Re: [mailop] keeping rejected mails in queue for second attempt acceptable?

responses that you're getting, and can check for those. That's why the receiving MTA should return a 4xx for a temporary problem. -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscri

Re: [mailop] Microsoft MSN JMRP SNDS support

7;s used in real life. If that doesn't work, you could try contacting Michael Wise and see if he can nudge someone. Maybe you'll have better luck than me. -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.

Re: [mailop] [External] Re: Horrible week for email deliverability - Looking for help with RackSpace/Emailsrvr

re were 'a small ESP', *my* immediate thought was that they were a larger version of us, rather than a smaller version of MailChimp. You obviously thought the opposite. Which is fine. But which could do with clarification. -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 8

Re: [mailop] [External] Re: Horrible week for email deliverability - Looking for help with RackSpace/Emailsrvr

not exactly onorous. That saves them loads of time and stress later when they can actually get through to someone who doesn't just reply with useless stock emails when they need help. -- Paul -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat

Re: [mailop] Sendgrid strikes again; zendesk, actually

of the message because "all text above this line is added to the ticket" -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe___ mailop mailing

Re: [mailop] Sendgrid strikes again; zendesk, actually

n will have that changed subject/message, not the original subject/message content. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailop mailing

Re: [mailop] Recipe vs fake From: header?

o.uk; s=some-gibberish; h=. and it would pass the DKIM check. DMARC requires the DKIM 'd' domain value (or the SPF Mail-From domain) to relate to the FROM message header. So, DMARC is what you need (along with DKIM and SPF, to give DMARC something to work with) -- Paul Smith C

Re: [mailop] Suggestions for mailops.org website - forum?

a forum a couple of years ago. Now, it's unusual for there to be as many as one message a month. If you can find a system which allows forum replies to be sent by email (basically a forum and mailing list in parallel), then that works OK, but they're not that common AFAIAA. -- Pa

Re: [mailop] Recipe vs fake From: header?

This is one thing that DMARC is intended to solve. DMARC checks the header 'From' address matches either the DKIM signature domain or the SPF domain. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www

Re: [mailop] How long to retry?

; folder, so that the user can see there that the message hasn't been delivered yet. Maybe if DSN was more widely supported, that would allow better user feedback as well.) -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 68

Re: [mailop] Abandoning self hosting and moving to Protonmail - experiences?

rivial use... https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/encrypt-for-outside-users/ Also, it doesn't look as if that email will be encrypted beyond Protonmail's ability to access, otherwise they wouldn't be able to show it to the recipient when they've logged into Protonmail&

Re: [mailop] Messages from small personal SMTP server being marked as junk by Google

of people. Using specific IP addresses is more 'optimised' than using 'mx'. ?all vs -all is all down to opinion. Personally, I'd never use '?all' - that seems to be a "we're not sure what we're doing yet" rule. ~all or -all is better IMHO.

Re: [mailop] Messages from small personal SMTP server being marked as junk by Google

and message content could affect things as well, but you haven't told us anything about that, so I can't comment on those. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___

Re: [mailop] Reasons to add plain text alternative to email?

te a reasonable plain text version quite easily and it'll probably be a small fraction of the size of the HTML version, so why not do it? (But test it! A lot of automated generation is rubbish - I've seen ones where the plain text version is identical to the HTML version - tags and al

Re: [mailop] Microsoft JMRP problem

On 03/12/2019 13:17, Paul Smith via mailop wrote: On 03/12/2019 13:15, Stephan Fourie wrote: Hi Paul, I've had success with mailing msn-s...@microsoft.com for support. Thanks, I'll try that and see how it goes. Hey ho, I tried that and the response was basically "prove that y

Re: [mailop] Microsoft JMRP problem

On 03/12/2019 13:15, Stephan Fourie wrote: Hi Paul, I've had success with mailing msn-s...@microsoft.com for support. Thanks, I'll try that and see how it goes. Kind Regards, Stephan On 2019/12/03 14:33, Paul Smith via mailop wrote: Hi, does anyone know any contact details f

[mailop] Microsoft JMRP problem

e 'contact email address' for the feed, but can't delete it or remove the unwanted IP addresses from it. I've trawled the SNDS pages looking for who to contact for problems with it, but all it seems to say is "it's fully automated so do it all yourself" - I w

Re: [mailop] ItaliaOnLine (@libero.it, +) now interpreting DMARC p=none as p=quarantine

se positives. On the other hand, if this is JUST for mail from msn.com, they may have decided that that domain is established enough that hopefully the admins know what they're doing, so may have an exception to treat mail FROM THAT DOMAIN as p=quarantine (similarly with gmail.com, whic

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Reasons ISPs (Microsoft) ignore DMARC policy?

d out how to use DKIM with their mail server yet, and, since 'normal' messages will pass DMARC with just SPF, then they leave it at that. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs

Re: [mailop] Reasons ISPs (Microsoft) ignore DMARC policy?

free email addresses like Hotmail & Gmail, so I guess those providers are stuck between a rock and a hard place - either reject spoofed and forwarded mail and upset users, or accept it and upset users. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up

Re: [mailop] reputation with DKIM when d= differs from sender domain?

zonSES signature), but other people probably do different things. That doesn't mean we distrust DKIM signatures from ISPs, ESPs or hosting companies, just that we ignore them if the signature verifies, because that tells us nothing useful. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01

Re: [mailop] Avoiding bounces - custom spamfilter behind real-spamfilter that reject mails

- do you queue the message (in which case you have to handle backscatter anyway) or reject it (in which case, you may have to do duplicated work, and your customer may prefer that you queued the message to prevent the risk of them losing it) -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 V

Re: [mailop] FW: Junk filtering as a tool for unfair competition

in the message to give the content filter something to look at. (eg "This is a test message from Bob at Bobtech Ltd. Please let Jim in your IT department know if it worked or not"). Also, make each test message different, or that can look spammy as well, and don't send zillions at o

Re: [mailop] Do we need Spam folders?

eral, rejecting is the worse option. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Do we need Spam folders?

amminess is important - a spam folder is generally sorted by date or whatever, which means you have to look through it all. If it's sorted by spamminess, then a quick glance can catch the majority of false positives. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 85580

Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam

Google can improve that perception, it wouldn't harm them. However, any changes that Google make would have to be scaleable and not affect their existing service - and that's outside my experience, so I'm reluctant to give them 'advice' ;-) -- Paul Smith Computer Se

Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam

mail isn't one of the reasons. (It is one of the reasons I don't like a certain other big ESP). Gmail has blocked us in the past, but we've understood why and sorted it out. You've been told the probably reason why your mail is being blocked, so you know what you can do ab

Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam

u to move to a hosting company which actually takes abuse seriously.  It's pretty pointless arguing about it - it's the way it is. If you use a spammer haven to host your emails, you're likely to be blocked, so don't do that. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484

Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam

n of bad gmail email addresses to good ones is probably quite low. Compare that to the proportion of bad/good domains on certain TLDs and you'll see that gmail email addresses are far more trustworthy. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53

Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam

If the recipients don't like it, they can complain to Gmail (or go elsewhere). From my experience, Gmail is actually not that bad - at least they put your message into a spam folder where it may possibly be found. I know other big email service providers who will just silently discard your messag

Re: [mailop] Weird blocking by outlook.com (S3150)

pportrequestform/8ad563e3-288e-2a61-8122-3ba03d6b8d75 Alternatively, change your hosting company to one which takes more care to stop spammers using their servers/network. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http:

Re: [mailop] live.fr admin required

in the hope that by annoying them, they’d take action because polite requests didn’t work. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe ___ mailo

Re: [mailop] Hotmail: Moving Email to 'spam' folder generates ISP complaint?

x27; messages disappear after a few days as well? I honestly don't know because I've not used Hotmail for ages or Office365 at all, but it seems like a fairly standard thing to happen. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news &a

Re: [mailop] SPF: What happens if includes specify different 'all' settings?

early exit conditions when processing the record) So, if the included record said "-ip4:123.0.0.0/16" then that would be (sort of) ignored just as "-all" is. (See the table on page 22 of RFC 7208) (An included record of "-ip4:123.123.123.123 ip4:123.123.123.0/2

Re: [mailop] The utility of spam folders

now go away, and don't reply to this message' response. If they DO unblock an IP address, then they're quick enough to block it again if necessary (which is the right thing to do). -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No:

Re: [mailop] The utility of spam folders

s no idea who you are, and they have no way to tell you from any other mailer whose mail they're not delivering. When you contact Microsoft about an IP address, THEY should be able to see what some recent messages from that IP address were, and why it's been blocked, to be able to guess

Re: [mailop] Anyone from Mandrill/Mailchimp here?

27;m fairly sure I just have a free Mailchimp account, so why I'd be asked to check my billing details was suspicious. I didn't know it was already known about, so I reported it :-) Normally I don't bother because I know there's nothing that the phishee can reasonably do about i

[mailop] Anyone from Mandrill/Mailchimp here?

Report-Abuse: You can also report abuse here: http://mandrillapp.com/contact/abuse?id=30903452.cef683aebe194acebd48d0ee662499fe X-Mandrill-User: md_30903452 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 17:04:30 + MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_av-tmIbwtKaFByrlcctRqVPTg" --

[mailop] Confusing error message from outlook.com

fferent meaning of the *recipient's* domain not existing. Does that sound like what's happened? The misinterpreted error message caused confusion and consternation by our customer (the recipient) because they thought their domain had vanished somehow. (BTW - the sender's doma

Re: [mailop] TLS Statistics

pient mail admins get together to discuss it, NO ONE will know which servers have access to a particular message) People often think 'Ooh, my emails are sent using TLS1.3 encryption - no one can see them, they're safe'. Nothing could be further from the truth. -- Paul Smith Co

Re: [mailop] TLS Statistics

chnically possible to enforce the use of encryption - because even if only 5% or so won't be deliverable in that case, that's a LOT of emails. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe

Re: [mailop] TLS Statistics

#x27;s route. PCI-DSS requires TLS 1.2 (AFAIAA), but then, for email, it's also OK to use no encryption at all, so take from that what you will... -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/s

Re: [mailop] What should an MTA do when receiving 452 4.5.3 (aka too many recipients)

the 4.5.3 should be preceded by 451, not 452 (SMTP defines 451 as 'Requested action aborted; error in processing') -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe __

Re: [mailop] GDPR and SMTP in general

On 25/05/2018 11:22, Stefano Bagnara wrote: On Fri, 25 May 2018 at 11:55, Paul Smith wrote: [...] If someone sends a message from the UK to someone in the USA, by definition, we must send that email outside of the EU. When we send the email, we are sending personal data (eg usually the name

Re: [mailop] GDPR and SMTP in general

pt its own encrypted data automatically, then the decryption key/method is on the PC, so not going to stop a determined attacker. Disk encryption is great on a laptop. Not sure it is anywhere else. -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for ne

Re: [mailop] GDPR and SMTP in general

On 25/05/2018 11:33, Graeme Fowler wrote: On 25 May 2018, at 10:46, Paul Smith wrote: But, how it interacts with email, it all seems to get very horrible. I suspect the *intention* is OK, but I'm struggling with the actual regulations. Whilst this specific article (written by Andrew Co

[mailop] GDPR and SMTP in general

issues. I thought it was all OK, but one of our customers asked us to sign a contract for GDPR which prevents us from sending data outside of the UK and from sending it to any other companies without prior written permission. I've pointed out the problems to them, but wondered if anyone els

Re: [mailop] Disabling TLS1.0 for SMTP

u're also preventing unencrypted traffic and know you will only be dealing with people where that won't be a problem (eg on an intranet). -- Paul Smith Computer Services Tel: 01484 855800 Vat No: GB 685 6987 53 Sign up for news & updates at

Re: [mailop] spf and mx: tokens

On 11/04/2018 22:41, Carl Byington wrote: So we could (do what they want) interpret mx:mail.example.com as if it were a:mail.example.com - we won't be rejecting mail that the sending domain intended for us to accept. But that just hides their error and possibly increases the chances of yet more f

Re: [mailop] Anyone from Fasthosts.co.uk on here?

On 25/01/2018 21:46, Carl Byington wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Wed, 2018-01-24 at 09:30 -0500, Al Iverson wrote: Smells like a Fasthosts misconfiguration from here. If they are doing ip queries against the DBL for all connections, they will be refusing all incomin

Re: [mailop] Anyone from Fasthosts.co.uk on here?

On 24/01/2018 13:43, Olaf Petry - Hornetsecurity wrote: dbl.spamhaus.org is a domain blacklist, So I guess the email contains a link which is listed there and the reject code is an unfortunate phrase. You'd hope so - but, no. The email contains no links and the sender's domain is not in the

[mailop] Anyone from Fasthosts.co.uk on here?

We've had some messages rejected from Fasthosts' MX mail servers with an error like this: -- 550 5.7.1 Service unavailable; client [188.65.177.237] blocked using dbl.spamhaus.org -- dbl.spamhaus.org doesn't list IP addresses, so I'm not sure what's going on. I don't know if

Re: [mailop] Best rate limiting response?

On 12/09/2017 22:36, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: So, looking at our code, for our daily send limits for consumers, we do use a 550 response. Thinking about this, it makes sense.  It's not a short term temporary condition, it's something that could take hours to resolve, and having your mai

Re: [mailop] Sender MX pointing to *.registrar-servers.com => 100% Spam!

On 31/08/2017 16:15, Benoit Panizzon wrote: Strange, todays active domain is: apparty.bid apparty.bid descriptive text "v=spf1 ip4: -all" We do check SPF, so why did this email pass? Is 'ip4:' equivalent to the whole IPv4 space? No, that's an invalid rule. Maybe your SPF checker is letting m

  1   2   >