[mailop] Gmail.com SPF false negatives?

gmail.com started failing messages from domains which are correctly setup for SPF (and have been for some years): 550-5.7.26 Gmail requires all senders to authenticate with either SPF or DKIM. 550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 Authentication results: 550-5.7.26 DKIM = did not pass 550-5.7.26 SPF [

Re: [mailop] Gmail.com SPF false negatives?

Thanks everybody! It's odd. Some messages are getting through. It's just this particular domain and MTA. Other domains and other mail servers are not having any issues sending to gmail..com. Intermittent DNS failures are always a possibility. We have a 3rd party DNS/HTTP/SMTP monitor, which hasn'

Re: [mailop] Gmail.com SPF false negatives?

Thanks again for all the advice. No problems today so far. I suspect this was some type of network issue, which affected only part of the Google network. As noted, we had zero failures for all domains but this one, and we had no failures sending to paid Google Workspace domains. Emanuel: > This w

Re: [mailop] This is..Concerning: DatabaseUSA Wins Case Against The Spamhaus Project

It is actually more sinister than anybody realizes. I did some research into Charles "Charlie" Benn. He is working on new technology to get spam into the UK and the EU. He works undercover for a real estate company

[mailop] No answer from abuse-att.net?

216.17.132.35 is being blocked by AT&T. We (bivio.com) got the auto-response (twice) from abuse_...@abuse-att.net, but it's been a week without a change or email. Here's a sample log entry: Dec 15 15:12:53 postfix/smtp[31789]: F1CCF8D3092: to=, relay=al-ip4-mx-vip1.prodigy.net[144.160.235.143]:25,

Re: [mailop] [E] $GOOG

Having run smallish mail servers for about four decades, the oppressors have won "mostly" for me. This week/end I am migrating my partner's single-person firm's domain to Google Workspace. This thread is topical, interesting, and hilarious to skim. Indeed, as I sat down to write this I received "Ev

Re: [mailop] [E] $GOOG

On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 8:54 PM yuv via mailop wrote: > (1) the dissociation of cost and benefits. economic externalities. > (2) the dissociation of liability and control. > (3) competing ownership/property claims. All excellent points! I would add that reputation management is a hidden tax (neg

Re: [mailop] get bulk spam messages

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 5:59 AM wilson via mailop wrote: > I expect to get lots of spam messages from the realworld to train the > bayes. do you know how to get bulk spam messages easily? > Open port 25? Rob ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org h

[mailop] Abusix & AT&T unblock request?

Looking for help from Abusix and AT&T. A new (to us) Linode IP 170.187.200.41 is being blocked by Abusix and AT&T. The sending domains are zoescore.com, bivio.com and sensorimotor.org. We sent toabuse_...@abuse-att.net and got a warning much later than the 4 hours shown below. Not sure the messag

[mailop] Comcast thottling at a dozen emails

I'm struggling to get mail through to Comcast on our new-to-us IPs from Linode. We are a sending less than a dozen emails and getting throttled: May 23 14:14:46 atl3i postfix/smtp[5795]: 53C0A915D: to=< redac...@comcast.net>, relay=mx1c1.comcast.net[96.102.18.148]:25, delay=460, delays=458/1.7/0.7

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Comcast thottling at a dozen emails

Thanks everybody. It resolved overnight. Alex, thanks for checking. I didn't think outbound rate limiting would be required for so few messages, but I guess it makes sense (in a way). I added a simple one just now. Seems like having an exponential moving average for inbound rate limiting would be

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:16 AM Bill Cole wrote: > That claim does apply to the simplest sort of mailing list, implemented > simply as an alias that 'explodes' into multiple recipients. > > That form of mailing list was already dying out 20 years ago when SPF > was being specified. I expect that it

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:17 PM Bill Cole wrote: > Which part? "That form of mailing list was already dying out 20 years ago" I don't think people were rewriting From: or envelope from at that time. They were managing bounce addresses. To test my conjecture, I downloaded mailman-2.1.15 (2012-06

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 7:02 AM Bill Cole wrote: > Rewriting header and envelope addresses is as old as Sendmail. > > > I'm mystified by your distinction between rewriting the envelope sender > and "managing bounce addresses." Since this has been a discussion of history, one used to be able to set

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 5:34 PM John Levine wrote: > I think you underestimate the persistence and bad faith of spammers. I certainly don't. > That also doesn't scale. There are at least 100,000 mail systems on > the Internet. How many complaints per second are you prepared to > investigate and

Re: [mailop] trusted notifier, Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:44 AM John Levine wrote: > If you want reliable identification of the sender, tell them to sign the > messages with S/MIME or PGP. We already know how to do that. That's half the problem. We need a substitute for a PKI. > Trusted notifier schemes exist and work to some

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 9:54 PM Dave Crocker wrote: > Within the NIST context, this might qualify as a kind of 'user', but > resolving that 'might' would indeed get into quibbling. Agreed. > None of the relevant systems have C-R as a component, so I'm guessing > you mean this as an exemplar of th

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Announces Tenant Trusted ARC Seal

On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 6:04 PM Dave Crocker wrote: > OK. So you are suggesting something that is independent of > spf/dkim/dmarc/arc? That's fine, I guess, but I thought this thread was > discussing those. Apologies. I hijacked this thread. Taking the discussion offline. Rob __

[mailop] Getting Microsoft to delete an impersonation

This is a long shot. There's an address (radiasoft...@outlook.com) that was not created by anybody at RadiaSoft. Somebody is using it to open *multiple* bank accounts at BofA. We would like to have it deleted. We have no credentials for it, of course. Any idea how to get this email deleted from MS'

Re: [mailop] Getting Microsoft to delete an impersonation

Michael Irvine writes: > This is a lot bigger of an issue than just an email. If BofA is allowing accounts to be opened in a company without doing a proper check first, then they have an issue. Yes, it's a bigger issue, and we *think* BofA is on top of it, but it's really been tricky to deal with