On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:47 +0200, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>on another topic I was talking about a MIPSPACE-POOR listing a /16
>including my /25 on OVH and everyone here told that OVH is "the worst
>of the worst" one can choose as hosting.
OVH recently instituted policies that would
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:01:43 +0200, Philip Paeps wrote:
>Unfortunately, rejecting all mail from OVH would result in rather more
>than one or two false positives. They (inexplicably?) have quite a lot
>of legitimate customers too. :/
Surprising, but true. One or two of them are deliverability
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:35:51 +0200, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>Well, we are back talking about OVH ;-(
[snip]
>At the end of 2015 they set up port-25 sniffing on all customers.
Several of my clients who established new service at OVH reported that, at
that time, no new customers were permitted ou
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:24:40 -0700, Steve Atkins wrote:
>Another vote for this. Mostly because Exchange has[1] a bad habit
>of occasionally modifying email as it's sent...
And as it is received. If you are looking at mail as received by an Exchange
server, be aware that header elements may be r
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 10:49:09 -0700, Brandon Long via mailop
wrote:
>Gmail also restricted all usernames that it's employees used and all
>popular names. More because they figured it would lead to confusion, I
>know the guy who had dave@yahoo and even a decade ago it was nearly useless
>with peop
On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 16:37:55 -0500, David Harris wrote:
>Thoughts? Are there best practices for something like this?
I will note that, when Microsoft Global Security tried their own version of
this a few years back, intending to gauge the degree to which the employee
population would fall for phi
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:27:48 -0500, Nick Schafer wrote:
>Anyone else not getting recent data back from Google Postmaster Tools? I
>know there is the usual lag of a day or two but I'm not seeing anything
>since the 2nd.
Widely reported. Same here.
mdr
--
"There are no laws here, only a
On Wed, 09 Aug 2017 10:36:37 -0500, Bryan Bradsby
wrote:
>postmas...@texas.gov,
>Bryan Bradsby
I'm assuming you are not associated with the regular spam from
"Office of the Governor" ?
mdr
--
"There are no laws here, only agreements."
-- Masahiko
__
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 09:03:43 -0500, Andrew Barrett
wrote:
>I think it's pretty cool that Michael is willing to provide any kind of
>guidance at all - it's not really his job. It would be a shame to see him
>walk away from forums like these because other participants insist on
>behaving like they a
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 08:46:42 +, Alexander Teklenburg
wrote:
>Good morning All,
>
>Anyone from ARM Research Labs or GBUdb.com on the list?
>We are having trouble with some of our IPs being listed on the service
>incorrectly. Wed like to find out more information on the listings so we can
>de
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 08:57:34 +1100, Mark Dale wrote:
>Is it just us or are others experiencing this?
>
>Any clues as to why would be greatly appreciated.
We're seeing it, with a sudden onset on the 14th. The IPs send requested
and/or transactional email, have excellent reputations, and are blo
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 09:38:22 -0500, Charles McKean
wrote:
>Or, perhaps TWC has made the very questionable choice to implement
>SORBS on a real ISP mail server. That would be one way to hold down
>load. Just randomly block a whole bunch of IP addresses that aren't
>actually spam sources.
>
>The pe
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 08:28:21 -0700, Scott Undercofler
wrote:
>Yes. We are much smarter than that.
Issue appears to be resolved. Thanks much.
mdr
--
"Honest folk do not wear masks when they enter a bank."
-- Unspiek, Baron Bodissey
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 11:24:31 -0500, John Possidente
wrote:
>Perhaps a forlorn hope: is there a list somewhere of the meanings for the
>AUP#I- error codes?
I stumbled across the postmaster page at TWC (I have conveniently forgotten
the URi) which had a comprehensive-looking list. The message
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:53:15 -0500, Al Iverson
wrote:
>I agree 100% here. Could there be a bug? Sure. Is it likely, based on
>the data scene so far? No, not really.
Agreed. Withal the fact that the platform is nearing the end of a massive
conversion/merge suggests above-average weight be given
On 16 Jan 2018 11:26:07 -0500, "John Levine" wrote:
>Is this a practical joke?
One could be forgiven for believing that the prime revenue model is "money
from subscribers to the 'service'".
mdr
--
Sometimes half-ass is exactly the right amount of ass.
-- Wonderella
On 17 Jan 2018 16:52:46 -0500, "John Levine" wrote:
>It's gotten a lot worse lately. Have other people noticed this? And
>what broke at Microsoft? Nobody else has this much trouble avoiding
>blowback.
Mostly, I've just noticed the overnight quadrupling of the spam load for
several hundred lad
On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:27:29 -0400, Marc Goldman via mailop
wrote:
>We also have multiple Green Arrow installs. It is a great MTA and the support
>is excellent and I find their pricing model is really quite fair.
Delighted to hear that.
>With that said, it isnt perfect. They control the Post
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:00:07 -0800, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
>From: Apple
>Typical Phishing/Fraud..
>
>Surprised that one got out..
It's been a few years since I had an office a few doors down from Michael
Wise's, but our battle against fraudulent signups for onmicrosoft accounts
reminded me of
On Sat, 21 Apr 2018 12:19:02 -0400, Al Iverson
wrote:
>It blacklists an unrelated party, is my point. Not only is it unfair,
>but it makes for pretty useless and sloppy spam fighting.
My personal experience is that, even if no listing occurs, there will be time
wasted responding to "screaming pi
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:27:34 -0600, Brielle Bruns wrote:
>Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers
>(exim based):
>
>
>2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90
>2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO from [157.25.104.90]: syntactically
>invalid a
We have a product, GreenArrow Monitor, that is a fairly standard inbox rate
monitoring tool. Senders incorporate the Monitor seed list, our robot
collects and collates the data, users see the results, merriment may or may
not ensue.
Recently we had occasion to investigate weirdness in Hotmail sta
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:13:35 -0600, Paul Kincaid-Smith
wrote:
>if Microsoft's filters were aggressively moving heaps of *wanted* email out of
>the inbox, I'd expect Outlook's read rates to be lower, but my metrics show
>that read rates at Outlook are often in line with read rates at Gmail and
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 18:46:53 +, Michael Wise
wrote:
>
>Do these accounts ever *SEND* email?
>
Asking for a friend.
Ours don't. No idea about Paul's sampling methods.
mdr
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:44:03 -0600, Paul Kincaid-Smith
wrote:
>Yes, the vast majority of mailboxes in EmailGrades' panel are actively used
>by real humans who send and receive email. (But even so, I wouldn't count
>on people replying to most legitimate commercial email like promotions or
>purchas
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 20:20:27 +, Vladimir Gabrielescu
wrote:
>It could be the focus inbox effect. If the user ignores your mail long enough
>then they dont even see it
And there would need to be a mechanism for that to happen. If the mechanism
defined by the provider is "make modifications
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:46:12 +0200, Thomas Walter wrote:
>Does this happen "recently"?
Saw it yesterday. Haven't started work yet today.
>Then it might be a result of the efail issue with people disabling HTML
>and external content? Or that the MS mail services have modified their
>handling
On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 16:10:15 +, Mihai Costea wrote:
>Michael, the two sample accounts you sent privately had no safesenders at all.
Correct. When our team discovered extensive unsolicited modifications to the
safe and blocked lists, they cleared them out -- we really need accurate data
if
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 07:59:45 +0100 (BST), Andrew C Aitchison
wrote:
>Wont a simple text MUA like mutt or (al)pine retrieve a message
>without visiting any of the links ?
Certainly. I use alpine, and a Windows text MUA from the late Cretaceous
(Agent), and it doesn't retrieve diddly unless I spe
I have today learned that mdr-2...@ymail.com, mdr-2...@ymail.com, and
mdr-anythingat...@ymail.com all deliver to m...@yahoo.com.
Fascinating...
mdr
--
There's a funny thing that happens when you know the correct
answer. It throws you when you get a different answer that
is not wrong.-- Dr B
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:47:50 -0500, Michael Rathbun wrote:
>Fascinating...
Lots of interesting words about separators, thanks to all, but...
> Tue 2018-06-19 13:32:31: [197232] --> MAIL
> From: SIZE=1300
> Tue 2018-06-19 13:32:31: [197232] <-- 250 sender
> ok
>
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:20:47 -0400, "Bill Cole"
wrote:
>Not sure if that is intended sarcastically, but YES, I DO love it.
No sarcasm on my watch, no indeed.
mdr
--
If I laugh when a guy goes flying on a banana peel, is that a
schadenfreudian slip?
-- Zippy
__
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:03:49 -0500, Michael Rathbun wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:47:50 -0500, Michael Rathbun wrote:
>
>>Fascinating...
And, this morning, I discover that m...@yahoo.fr delivers to me as well.
{heavy sigh}
mdr
--
We are all temps.
--
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:42:16 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>Office365 and Hotmail/Outlook/Live/MSN are very much distinct systems, even
>thought they are now running on the same hardware.
>Sort of like BASH vs TCSH.
Given an episode where a client is seeing the "unfortunately not de
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 10:41:46 -0400, "Eric Tykwinski"
wrote:
>Did you submit to ab...@outlook.com?
Unless something has changed profoundly since I worked there, no human will
likely ever read ab...@microsoft.com or the other domains concerned. I would
be delighted to discover that this is no lon
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 16:28:01 -0400, "Eric Tykwinski"
wrote:
>I really hope your wrong, since it's in their FAQs.
>https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Deal-with-abuse-phishing-or-spoofing-in-Outlook-com-0d882ea5-eedc-4bed-aebc-079ffa1105a3
>
>Reporting abuse
>
>If you're being threatened,
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 15:24:07 -0700, Brandon Long via mailop
wrote:
>I would also point out that seeing differences between mailbox providers in
>this instance is not really a surprise. It may have more to do with which
>random address people use in these situations. They may be choosing Gmail
>
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 18:13:46 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>Its abuse.
>And it takes many forms.
>There are many stories like Mr. Rathbuns
already enunciated.
>And then theres stuff like this:
>
> http://www.honet.com/Nadine/default.htm
Thanks for jogging my memory.
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 13:28:32 -0700, Laura Atkins
wrote:
>We should sit down over cold frosty beverages next time were in the same
>town. (SF next feb? Budapest next June?)
Ooh, I'd love to be in on that one. Not bloody likely, alas.
mdr
--
"Honest folk do not wear masks when they enter a ba
On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 11:00:10 -0400, Vick Khera wrote:
>I think this falls in the "known trouble makers" category that some address
>validation vendors report as "do not send". I used to keep a list of
>anti-spam folks as part of my traps against new customer list imports, and
>shockingly it did t
On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 22:53:45 +1200 (NZST), Simon Lyall
wrote:
>So I guess some of the domains generated in the above email are so bad
>they generated bounces from around 220 list members.
Heh. On this end, it merely generated a SpamAssassin score of 26.8, despite
the massive "known mailing lis
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 19:25:12 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>If you start to see 4xx deferrals (esp. 3113, 3114, 3115, 3150,
) from the
>Hotmail/Outlook/et al data centers, you should know that the IP has been
>throttled, and one would be well advised, given that situation, to STOP al
Miscreants have correctly guessed that the AUTH Fail lockout here had a
relatively narrow window during which a second failure would trigger blockage.
Cometh now 213.123.221.101, from btopenworld, that slid through by retrying
every 25 minutes. It also EHLOs as "192.168.0.1", which is a bit of a
On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 08:46:05 +0200, Benoit Panizzon
wrote:
>Hi List
>
>Now I am sort of baffled, after a lengthy email exchange about the
>blocklist case, Microsoft states:
>
>"As previously stated, your IP(157.161.12.54) is mitigated at this time.
>I do apologize, but I am unable to provide any d
Noticing that yesterday's IMAP server log was 3.3K in size, and today's is (so
far) 173K, I observe that a huge variety of IPs, mostly on CBL, are interested
in talking to the server (993 is the only open IMAP port).
A very large number of the sessions involve attempts to authenticate a
non-exis
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:55:09 +, Jim Popovitch via mailop
wrote:
>There is a certain irony in a bulk sender asking for others to intervene and
>unsubscribe them.
It's been one of those weeks when such events are an almost-welcome tickle.
mdr
--
Sometimes half-ass is exactly the right am
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:29:50 +, Lindani Tshabangu via mailop
wrote:
>Hi Guys,
>
>Is anyone experiencing any Tin.it issues with this error bounce:
>421 vsmtp8.tin.it Service not available - too busy
All the time. The server IS quite busy, judging by the amount of spam it
sends.
mdr
--
"
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 11:04:03 +, Laura Atkins
wrote:
>Last time I talked to a SC employee, which admittedly was more than a few
>years ago, about their trap conditioning they were using a 2+ year cycle of
>actively rejecting mail to trap domains. If your users cant figure out how to
>stop
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 19:36:48 +, David Carriger
wrote:
[defeating the "remove canonical .sig" mechanism]
> Failure to do so will cause C'thulhu to rise from the depths of R'lyeh and
> devour your firstborn child, and you'll accidentally read spoilers for the
> last season of Game of Thrones
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 01:41:24 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>/grr
>Why are all my replies only going to the original author of late?
Given
>Reply-To: Michael Wise
in the headers, I would classify this as "the expected behaviour".
mdr
--
Sometimes half-ass is exactly the right am
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 16:51:38 +, Laura Atkins
wrote:
>Personally, I believe Microsoft is going to do what theyre going to do. This
>isnt just about their filtering, this is a giant corporate culture that has
>some Extremely Poor Policies that are unfriendly to people and are actively
>har
On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 13:27:30 +, Jan Mollenhauer via mailop
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>we are an email service provider. Our customers use our software to send
>newsletter.
>Our software and servers are configured with all best practices like SPF,
>DKIM, DMARC, RDNS. We have also processes implemente
On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 09:58:45 -0500, Michael Rathbun wrote:
>>The IPs are from different networks and being used by different customers...
And I should have mentioned that "same spam from different networks, from same
sending operation" is one of the most instantaneous ways of ge
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 12:07:13 +0100, Syed Alam wrote:
>We are assuming it is really a hard bounce and Yahoo is retiring inactive
>addresses. Just a heads up that the bounce rate at Yahoo will most likely
>increase until they mark all these inactive addresses as passive.
Many of the major mailbox
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 11:18:50 -0400, Lili Crowley via mailop
wrote:
>These are legitimate inactive accounts being removed as a clean-up effort.
Lovely. More arrows in the quiver.
mdr
--
"There are no laws here, only agreements."
-- Masahiko
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:41:07 -0700, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
>Someone thinks it funny to do it on April Fools..
>
>Attacks Port 587, uses an EHLO of server.com, looks to be router
>compromises, but instead of the typical distributed low volume this one
>is hitting hard.. But see some other types
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 07:51:47 -0700, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
>This has gone on now for more than a month, and they aren't even trying
>to hide..
>
>50 more IP(s) and domains overnight..
Each of those netblock contributes several IPs conducting the
"EHLO server. com" AUTH LOGIN attacks, now in i
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 08:35:48 -0700, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
>Don't even get us started on the AUTH Attacks ;)
>
>Course, those (server.com) are coming from all the Content Delivery
>Networks.. Thankfully, that bot net is less than 1000 IP(s) strong still.
>
>But the AUTH attacks related to serve
On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 08:01:15 -0700, Michael Peddemors
wrote:
>The pgHammer continues to lead in the sheer volume of attempts, but is
>down to only 271 servers still operational. (Amazon, five are still on
>your network)
The stats for yesterday showed a mere 279 IPs and a paltry 7,551 hits. S
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:06:41 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>Why in the *WORLD* would you think that INBOX placement is based on such a
>small set of factors...?
Every culture or area of endeavour develops its own set(s) of legend and lore.
It is not uncommon, for instance, to see solem
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 23:48:29 +0100, Chris Woods
wrote:
>This is an interesting topic - it's one I'm affected by.
I see these things from multiple angles, having been on the Office 365 spam
analyst team for 2.5 years before taking a position doing deliverability
consulting and policy enforcement
On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 04:52:42 +, Sébastien Riccio
wrote:
>We noticed that near 100% of the complaints are legit mails, almost none of
>them are real SPAM.
Here's another real-world perspective: I have an antique Yahoo! account that
still, after 25 inactive years, gets a wide variety of unso
On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 21:39:48 +0200, Thomas Walter wrote:
>And force people like me to resubscribe every 90 to 180 days, because I
>don't allow tracking nonsense in emails?
That's your option, certainly. However, if you run a large "free" mail
system,
o you discover that up to 80% of the mail
On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:40:57 +0200, Thomas Walter wrote:
>As a "free" mail system provider, I'd disable those abandoned accounts
>and not rely on the email senders to track their recipients and stop
>sending mails.
>
>Is there anything wrong with telling the sender: "550 Mailbox abandoned
>for X
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 09:02:19 -0400, Bryan Blackwell
wrote:
>I'd just like to point out that there are some - perhaps not many, but some -
>of us who deliver mail where the subscriber most certainly is the customer.
>My list server at corvair.org was paid for entirely by individual subscribers,
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 19:19:09 -0600, Dave Warren wrote:
>I strongly disagree here, the freemail providers have a product (your
>eyeballs) to sell to their customers (the advertisers). Their customers
>aren't particularly interested in advertising on a service without users.
Indeed. However you
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 11:43:56 +0100, Laura Atkins
wrote:
>Ah. Youre new here. According to reports by MS employees the use of
>boilerplates is mandated by legal and nothing can be sent that is not
>pre-approved by the legal department.
Occasionally real information may leak through. When I w
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:02:50 +0100, Paul Smith wrote:
>It really depends on what mail server software is running on the Windows
>server, so can you give that information? There are many different mail
>servers for Windows.
My question as well. There are several well-done server packages. And
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 11:58:23 -0500, Al Iverson
wrote:
>To elaborate, it's like saying you're looking for somebody who works
>on cars. It's not descriptive enough. Foreign? Domestic? Specializes
>in VW?
Aye.
For instance, in the server I use (MDaemon) it is a matter of going to the
right config
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 14:41:44 -0400, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>Yes, but...
>
>If you can run a mail system *properly* for 50,000 people, then you can
>run it properly for 500 million. It's not really all that different
>or difficult.
You apparently have yet to run up against the version of the squ
Howdy,
We have seen a trickle of complaints to our upstream naming one of our hosted
customer's IPs as a culprit. The spamcomplain software used by the
complainant (always the same complainant) fixes on a header line like this:
>Received: from (customer's IP) (EHLO fgateway13.ISP.att.net) (207.1
On Fri, 6 May 2016 09:20:06 +0200, Syed Alam wrote:
>Hi Michael,
>
>We have tried to contact msn-s...@microsoft.com few times now but didn't
>hear back.
>
>All the FBL complaints are going to previous IP owner's feed address which
>has no access(or should not have access) to the IP range.
>
>Any
A client who is more on top of things than the average has noticed some
mailings to him that have two DKIM signatures, and wondered whether there was
some advantage to that.
Of the two samples he sent, it was clear that one had been signed by an MTA
that relayed through another service, which also
On Fri, 20 May 2016 14:27:57 -0600, David wrote:
>Since they want $ to delist I would imagine most people are simply
>ignoring them.
They are on our "Don't Bother" list. Not much evidence that they measure
useful things and are used by anybody of significance.
mdr
--
The Duckage Is Feep.
On Fri, 20 May 2016 16:36:48 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>> Anyone flagging multiple signatures as problematic is probably clueless.
>
>
>It's not problematic, but since only 1 signature at a time can be
>validated any remaining sigs become basically untrusted ascii data.
Gmail definitely evalua
On Fri, 20 May 2016 17:00:37 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>Give me a (real world) example of how 2 DKIM sigs will be in the same
>email msg and both sigs will verify.
Here are two:
>Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
> dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@humblebundle.com;
> dkim=pass
On Fri, 20 May 2016 14:17:29 -0700, Brandon Long via mailop
wrote:
>Well, the first 5, for now. We can always raise that, but haven't seen a
>need yet.
Useful information. Thanks.
mdr
--
"Honest folk do not wear masks when they enter a bank."
-- Unspiek, Ba
This server sends a spam feed to Spamcop (it's Nadine, in fact).
So, of course, the IP is now listed on Spamcop.
Every day, it's something new.
mdr
--
Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they are
convinced beyond doubt that they are right.
-- Laurens Van Der Post
On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 18:22:55 -0500, Michael Rathbun wrote:
>Every day, it's something new.
Thanks for the prompt and effective off-line assistance. There were a couple
of messages I could not answer because the server currently has a "generic
static reverse DNS", and "
Howdy all (and especially Mr Wise),
I have a client, that rare job opportunity aggregator that delivers what was
asked for and stops delivering appropriately. They enjoy excellent reception
(and open rates at Gmail that vary from 28% to 45%) except at Hotmail, where
we find in Ticket SRX135482589
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 16:39:33 -0600, Jaren Angerbauer
wrote:
>Might also help, if using ceremonial smoke, to make sure and use the four
>representative smoke colors in the Microsoft logo.
A profound observation.
I confess that I never considered that aspect. A couple of those colours will
req
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 23:43:13 +, Eric Henson wrote:
>Rathbun posted ticket# SRX1354825893ID in his original email, so
not directed
>at him, Im guessing.
Goodness, yes. The participants have been co-belligerents for way far too
long.
mdr
--
Fail-safe systems fail by failing to fail safe.
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:22:55 -0700, Laura Atkins
wrote:
>Not at all. I didnt even see who posted the original request. Ive got to
>admit, I tend to glaze over the public requests for a representative for
>many reasons. Not the least of which they seem to be turning the list into a
>paging
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:44:18 +0200, Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
>+1 to that Steve, no idea where it came from as it seems quite polite
>and considered... Those of us with long memories still have their
>killfiles and still use them with maximum prejudice, but that just
>results in silence rather
On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 17:09:32 +, ryan prihoda
wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>We recently had to switch the IP on our "high volume" server , 200k email
>daily, and now we are being rate limited badly by AOL , Yahoo and Comcast
>, enough to impact our customers. We have been part of their respective
>fe
On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 10:18:24 -0400, Vick Khera wrote:
>You might get some relief contacting AOL directly (open a postmaster
>ticket), but I wouldn't count on anything from Yahoo even if they say
>they're doing something about it. I don't know about comcast as I've
>never had significant issues wi
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:10:49 +0100, Gilles Chehade via mailop
wrote:
>On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 12:00:28AM +1000, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>> David Hofstee wrote:
>> > The X- type headers are deprecated... https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6648
>> >
>> Oh now there's a bad idea if ever I heard one...
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 09:35:02 -0500, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
>On 2017-01-10 01:52 AM, Simon Lyall wrote:
>> http://sunsite.uakom.sk/sunworldonline/swol-12-1997/swol-12-vixie.html
>
>"He says about half of today's Internet mail traffic is spam". Ah, the
>good old days.
Good old, indeed -- back when I
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 03:24:09 +0100, Andreas Ziegler
wrote:
>btw, does anyone know if the big providers take into account that some
>spam is only forwarded, not originating?
I know of at least one very large provider that makes no attempt to identify
spam as forwarded, and where IPs that emit a ce
On 9 Feb 2017 04:30:21 -, "John Levine" wrote:
> For some of my users, I run
>the forwarded mailt through spamassassin, send it with SMTP if the
>score is low, put it in a folder for later POP pickup if the score is
>high.
I will set up a periodic POP
Clients are reporting massive unsubscribes due to bounces, where accounts are
known to be valid and active.
mdr
--
There's a funny thing that happens when you know the correct
answer. It throws you when you get a different answer that
is not wrong.-- Dr Bowman (Freefall)
__
On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:29:24 -0400, Lili Crowley
wrote:
>Could this be residual from last week (3/29)?
The reports are from around 03:00 Central time this morning. What's
frustrating is that a number of clients I have checked saw no problem at all.
We are digging deeper; perhaps a bounce proces
On Wed, 3 May 2017 11:31:20 -0400, Al Iverson
wrote:
>(Also wasn't emailing zip files filled with malware a fun exercise for
>some bad actors in recent history?)
As in "several hundred samples per day", that would be a "yes".
mdr
--
"There will be more spam."
-- Paul Vixie
_
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:26:23 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop
wrote:
>PS, pgHammer went quiet yesterday.. either someone caught/killed his C&C
>server, or the actor realized that there was too much attention on the
>activity. That doesn't mean those servers listed should not still be
>take
On Tue, 28 May 2019 11:57:01 -0600, "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop"
wrote:
>I'm pretty much giving up on Marketo - and about to BL them and also recommend
>to others that they do so - as I have *never* received anything other than
>spam from them, and while they may still have a few good pe
On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 03:17:32 -0700, Brian Kantor via mailop
wrote:
>Has anyone else seen this or had it happen to their mailboxes?
We get about three successful deliveries per week that fit this description.
They all come from CBL-listed boxes, almost entirely in .cn.
We would probably see sever
On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:25:40 +0200, Hetzner Blacklist via mailop
wrote:
>For the past two years things have been going really well for us in
>regards to the Microsoft blacklist. We've had very few issues, probably
>because we aggressively check the SNDS and block/terminate IPs/clients
>that send s
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 10:40:59 +0200, Hetzner Blacklist via mailop
wrote:
>That's really interesting, thanks for sharing Michael. I was under the
>impression that the Microsoft blacklist, at least the one for Outlook,
>and not O365, was an automated system. Do you know if it is still
>possible to ma
On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 19:49:15 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>All true progress depends on SOMEbody sticking their neck out.
>
I think.
Thou knowest, my brother.
mdr
--
The world is a real mixed bag but if you cant find the beauty in it
occasionally you might be the broken part.
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 00:25:06 +, Michael Wise via mailop
wrote:
>
>
>This was stomped on by our automatic systems about an hour ago.
Technology can be so much fun, if you embrace it in the proper spirit.
mdr
--
Sometimes half-ass is exactly the right amount of ass.
-- Wonderella
1 - 100 of 305 matches
Mail list logo
