* Bressier Simon via mailop :
> Hey guys !
>
> We have no datas from Google Postmaster tools since 13th June, Brandon, do
> you know if someone already aware/working on that ?
I can confirm issues with the DKIM/SPF/DMARC data starting 13th of
June (for all the domains under my control)
--
Ralf
I'm in the postmas...@python.org team.
https://sendersupport.olc.protection.outlook.com/snds/ is displaying
the IP for mail.python.org (188.166.95.178) as red/yellow.
We're seing a constant stream of mails to Outlook/Hotmail (mailing
list mail, double opt in, about 1500-3000 mails per day, less o
* Jim Popovitch via mailop :
> >So why the red/yellow status?
>
> I saw the same thing from them ~2 weeks ago.
It started about 3-4 month ago
> I went back and forth
> with them through email, but the only resolution was time. I firmly
> believe that they just wiped|lost their reputation DB an
* William Astle via mailop :
> Can a live.fr email admin with access to actually do something contact me?
> One of your users has been forwarding their email to my gmail account and
> refuses to stop doing so. I can provide evidence of the email forwarding
> (messages with full headers).
I mean,
* Michael Hallager via mailop :
> Unfortunately, I have also noticed this sender is certified by Return Path,
> and getting 3 points off our anti-spam because of this. I have contacted
> Return Path and their response would suggest they basically don't care.
>
> Has anyone else had this experienc
* Michael Wise via mailop :
>
>
> Sometimes ... pristine ... isn't.
Thought so.
> Presuppose y'all are doing bounce processing?
Yes.
This raises a question regaring spam traps:
*** Shouldn't spam traps reject all mails after the END-OF-DATA? ***
1) That way the spam trap addresses would
* Mathieu Bourdin :
> >*** Shouldn't spam traps reject all mails after the END-OF-DATA? ***
>
> If they did, they would be easily identifiable, and thus would have no value.
Well, the sender wouldn't know if it's a trap or if the server is just
FUBARed in some odd way.
> The thing with spamtrap
* Mathieu Bourdin :
> Hi again,
>
>
> First, a precision: my reply is missing 2 lines wich, for short,
> were saying: "but usually you don't get listed on the first sending to
> a trap,
Yes, because that would instantaneously blacklist all servers sending
double-opt-in
mails
> it's more an ac
* Michael Wise via mailop :
>
>
> You'd be surprised at the blank stares I've gotten in certain venues when I
> bring up Bounce Processing.
Oh. But indeed, our local morons here at the hospital keep sending out
their (opted in) mail to addresses long dead. Alas, no bounce
processing.
--
Ralf
* Jay Hennigan via mailop :
> Spamspeak is alive and well on this very list. Witness the ongoing
> appearance of the spammer term "double opt-in" in recent posts instead of
> "confirmed opt-in".
I'll rather use the term "confirmed opt-in" then :)
Also, it makes more sense, since the recipient ha
* Eric Tykwinski via mailop :
> So if Viktor's on the list, or anyone knows him, I owe him a beer.
Will forward it. Problem: Everybody owes him a beer :)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin
ralf.hildebra...@charite.deCampus Benjamin Franklin
https:/
* Dave Holmes via mailop :
> Error: "421 Service not available, closing transmission channel tnmpmscs"
After this outage they'll get shitloads of mails in a thundering herd
fashion, probably overwhelming their servers.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin
ral
* Caitlin Brodie via mailop :
> We also saw issues starting on September 4th, but our IPs' reputation in
> SNDS hasn't recovered yet, and neither has our open rate to Microsoft
> domains.
>
> Has anyone else continued to see deliverability issues to Microsoft domains
> after September 4th? We're t
Hi!
Since this morning, various MX hosts in *.mail.protection.outlook.com
reporting are reporting back temporary errors for us:
Exhibit A)
host ohri-ca.mail.protection.outlook.com[104.47.75.228] said: 452 4.5.3 Too
many recipients (AS780090) [YQBCAN01FT018.eop-CAN01.prod.protection.outlook.com
Hi!
We're running the postfix-users ML on list.sys4.de, and all over a
sudden we're being tempfailed by GMAIL:
421-4.7.28 Gmail has detected an unusual rate of unsolicited mail. To protect
421-4.7.28 our users from spam, mail has been temporarily rate limited. Please
421-4.7.28 visit
421-4.7.2
* Philip Paeps :
> On 2023-11-21 19:44:20 (+0800), Ralf Hildebrandt via mailop wrote:
> > We're running the postfix-users ML on list.sys4.de, and all over a
> > sudden we're being tempfailed by GMAIL:
>
> Welcome to the club. :) We're in the same boat with
* Stefano Bagnara :
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 12:54, Ralf Hildebrandt via mailop
> wrote:
> > We're running the postfix-users ML on list.sys4.de, and all over a
> > sudden we're being tempfailed by GMAIL:
>
> I saw something similar happening on a couple of my I
> we've been seeing a lot of mails since the weekend with three word
> alliterations as their only content.
Same here.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netz | Netzwerk-Administration
Invalidenstraße 120/121 | D-10115 Berlin
Tel. +49 30 450
Hi!
We're trying to send mail to fibertel.com.ar addresses and are
encountering a very odd type of blacklisting:
Aug 6 16:37:21 list02 postfix/error[156603]: 4WdFQY6wVlz10KF:
to=, relay=none, delay=48891,
delays=48885/6.3/0/0, dsn=4.7.1, status=deferred (delivery temporarily
suspended: host mx
* Bjoern Franke via mailop :
> > from a vServer, I recently got, I'm not able to sucessfully
> > receive answers from spamhaus:
> >
>
> is it a Cloud-Server at Hetzner?
Are they blocking the Hetzner net in it's entirety or only their recursive
resolvers?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitä
* Benoit Panizzon via mailop :
> One IP address of our email plattform, got a '20' score @
> senderscore.org because of emails to 'unknown recipients'
Well don't do that then. Data tends to "age", so after 1-2 weeks ist
should be OK again.
> So neither the sender nor the recipient notice there i
* Ken O'Driscoll via mailop :
> On Thu, 2020-01-02 at 16:54 -0800, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> > The header from is :feedbackl...@rackspacefbl.senderscore.net", however
> > there is no A or MX record for that domain..
>
> $ dig fbl.senderscore.net mx
> 10 ss-mx00.senderscore.net.
$ hos
> > why is it that everyone is still using noreply addresses to send
> > notifications
> > and other one-way messages?
Autoresponders. (out of office mostly).
If you're using a MLM, the "real" bounces go to the bounce processor
of the MLM. But stuff like Exchange/Outlook will autoreply to the
"F
> They answer to mails from noreply-Addresses.
Exactly.
> > MLMs don't use "noreply" address as well - they use their own list-specific
> > "bounce" address as envelope-from.
>
> Yes, but Exchange/Outlook will not reply to the Envelope sender, but to
> the From: as Ralf stated.
I've been throu
Anybody got a contact at netclient.no?
They're hiding behind a kafkaesque mail filtering system - and then
recommend registering at http://www.blocklist.eu/ which is impossible
without a Norwegian "Organisasjonsnummer" :(
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Geschäftsbereich
* Benoit Panizzon via mailop :
> A look in our postfix logs confirms, the envelope also was
> outlook_3dddb25f0278f...@outlook.com
A pragmatic approach would be to perform sender address validation in
Postfix whenever the envelope sender is outlook.com OR (more
specifically):
check_sender_access
* Ralf Hildebrandt via mailop :
> check_sender_access:
> /^outlook_[0-9A-F]+@outlook\.com$/ reject_unverified_sender
More precise:
/^outlook_[0-9A-F]{16}@outlook\.com$/ reject_unverified_sender
I'm also seeing some of those here.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitätsmed
* Daniele Rossi via mailop :
> we try to send to Microsoft Account and we receive this message:
>
> *Queued mail for delivery -> 250 2.1.5*
>
> The problem is that the mail does not arrive either in spam or in the inbox.
> This happens for most of our ip's.
>
> Can anyone explain this abnormal
* Michael Peddemors via mailop :
> Never heard of anyone doing that... It really wouldn't make sense
Hm, why not? After all, if somebody controls the certificates (issued
by domain verification, one would guess), they also control the
domains. All domains under the same control...
Ralf Hildebrand
* Scott Techlist via mailop :
> >I'm using the "registrar-servers.com" nameserver as a pretty good predictor
> >of spamminess. There are few exceptions of
> >legitimate senders who think they need such registration info protection but
> >they can be handled by individual exceptions.
>
> Hans-Mar
Does anybody have a competent technical contact for docuguide.com
issues? (DKIM/DMARC issue with a customer domain...)
Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Campus Benjamin Franklin (CBF)
Haus I | 1. OG | Raum 105
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-1220
* Michael Kliewe via mailop :
> I wrote an email to Vodafone/O2 4 months ago regarding a technical mistake
> in their system: E-Mails from the domain cc.o2online.de contain two
> "Date:"-headers.
o2 != Vodafone -- but both will ignore you, so there's not much difference :)
I just checked the ma
* Michael Kliewe via mailop :
> We saw 3 mails during the last 24 hours with multiple Date-Headers:
>
> Envelope From: no-re...@cc.o2online.de
> IP: 82.113.113.130 (mailserver1.viaginterkom.de)
> Subject: "Ihr angeforderter Web-Link von Telefonica"
>
> The system sending these "Web-Links" seems
* Richard Clayton via mailop :
> In some cases ... where phone numbers are present, then ringing that
> number (the only way that the recipient can contest the invoice) will
> get you to "PayPal Customer Service".
>
> They will explain that the bad invoice issue is well-known and direct
> you to
34 matches
Mail list logo
