Hi Suomi
( thanks for the response )
I have the following packages installed on my RHEL 7.8
cyrus-sasl-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
cyrus-sasl-devel-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
cyrus-sasl-ldap-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
cyrus-sasl-lib-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
cyrus-sasl-md5-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
cyrus-sasl-ntlm-2.1.26-
Just noticed a couple more in my Spam today from Francesc Peñalvez. It
looks like SPF is neutral and DMARC is failing:
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 2604:8d00:0:1::4 is neither permitted
nor denied by best guess record for domain of
owner-post
On 2020-04-26 10:37, Peter Ajamian wrote:
Just noticed a couple more in my Spam today from Francesc Peñalvez.
It looks like SPF is neutral and DMARC is failing:
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 2604:8d00:0:1::4 is neither permitted
nor denied by bes
On 26/04/20 10:47 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
talk to postmas...@almogavers.net ask for aspf not being set to strict,
also possible make fo tag on dmarc more relaxed
Except that this is a thread about what messages coming from the *list*
go to spam and what the *list* can do about it. It is not
Sorry if this has been tested before, but I joined the list only
lately.
Have you tried the google postmaster-tools for postfix.org and
especially adding the google-site-verification TXT?
Am Sonntag, den 26.04.2020, 23:07 +1200 schrieb Peter:
> On 26/04/20 10:47 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> > talk
* pe...@pajamian.dhs.org:
> [...] this is a thread about what messages coming from the *list* go
> to spam and what the *list* can do about it. It is not reasonable for
> the mailing list owner to ask every person who's messages go to spam
> because of a bad DMARC policy to change the policy.
It
I don't have the correct dkim entry in the domain?
El 26/4/2020 a les 13:18, Christian ha escrit:
Sorry if this has been tested before, but I joined the list only
lately.
Have you tried the google postmaster-tools for postfix.org and
especially adding the google-site-verification TXT?
Am Sonnt
On 4/26/20 7:07 AM, Peter wrote:
> On 26/04/20 10:47 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> talk to postmas...@almogavers.net ask for aspf not being set to
>> strict, also possible make fo tag on dmarc more relaxed
>
> Except that this is a thread about what messages coming from the
> *list* go to spam and w
On 26/04/20 11:26 pm, Ralph Seichter wrote:
* pe...@pajamian.dhs.org:
[...] this is a thread about what messages coming from the *list* go
to spam and what the *list* can do about it. It is not reasonable for
the mailing list owner to ask every person who's messages go to spam
because of a bad
On 27/04/20 12:00 am, Richard Damon wrote:
On 4/26/20 7:07 AM, Peter wrote:
On 26/04/20 10:47 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
talk to postmas...@almogavers.net ask for aspf not being set to
strict, also possible make fo tag on dmarc more relaxed
Except that this is a thread about what messages comi
On 27/04/20 12:00 am, Richard Damon wrote:
Except that if the sender is sending from a domain with an email policy
that effectively says, "This domain is intended to send sensitive
information, please do not accept messages that do not come directly
from us", then it is reasonable to tell the sen
* pe...@pajamian.dhs.org:
> People may configure strict DMARC policies for various different
> reasons, may be unaware of the issues that causes and may not even
> have control over the domain at all.
Lack of knowledge is not an excuse, period. Lack of control just means
the domain's admin needs
On 2020-04-26 15:16, Ralph Seichter wrote:
prefixes or message footers, meaning DKIM signatures remain intact. Any
admin who uses DMARC while not having set up DKIM correctly is asking
for trouble. I won't lift a finger to work around the incompetence of
others in this case, nor do I think this
On 4/26/20 8:15 AM, Peter wrote:
> On 27/04/20 12:00 am, Richard Damon wrote:
>> Except that if the sender is sending from a domain with an email policy
>> that effectively says, "This domain is intended to send sensitive
>> information, please do not accept messages that do not come directly
>> fr
Dnia 26.04.2020 o godz. 08:00:56 Richard Damon pisze:
>
> This is exactly what DMARC is intended to indicate. Configuring a domain
> with DMARC says that it is intended that message only be accepted if
> they come directly from the sender. It was designed for things like
> Banks to be able to send
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 11:27:58AM +, Bandaru, Vamsi wrote:
> I am sorry if this query doesn't belong here , but I am trying to
> configure Cyrus SASL on Postfix to use our LDAP servers for
> authentication.
To be clear, it sounds like you want to use LDAP bind as a "password
oracle", that is
On 26/04/2020 13:21, Francesc Peñalvez wrote:
> I don't have the correct dkim entry in the domain?
In this post you have no dkim signature at all!
Juri
Juri Haberland:
> On 26/04/2020 13:21, Francesc Pe?alvez wrote:
> > I don't have the correct dkim entry in the domain?
>
> In this post you have no dkim signature at all!
Confirmed. Your message has no DKIM related headers at all.
That would explain why only SPF is in effect.
Wietse
Rec
On 4/26/20 3:23 PM, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> Dnia 26.04.2020 o godz. 08:00:56 Richard Damon pisze:
>> This is exactly what DMARC is intended to indicate. Configuring a domain
>> with DMARC says that it is intended that message only be accepted if
>> they come directly from the sender. It was designed
Thanks Viktor for the response ,
> To be clear, it sounds like you want to use LDAP bind as a "password oracle",
> that is the PLAIN (or LOGIN) SASL credentials of submissio users are verified
> by making an LDAP connection with the provided credentials. Is that right?
Correct , I am trying to
Dnia 26.04.2020 o godz. 17:00:31 Richard Damon pisze:
>
> I have never had GMail ask me to setup DMARC, they will ask you to setup
> SPF or DKIM as a first step for delivery problems, as letting them
Did you read https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126 ? (That's the page
their "sender troubl
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 10:35:58PM +, Bandaru, Vamsi wrote:
> After your recommendation this is what I have done :
>
> 1. commented out smtp service for inbound
>
> #smtp inet n - n - 200 smtpd -vv
Not sure why you did that. Is this a submission only MT
Thanks Viktor ,
> Not sure why you did that. Is this a submission only MTA? Inbound mail is
> handled somewhere else?
Yes V , i am setting this up to accept email sent from a vendor application
over the internet and relay the email to their destination ( usually to O365
where the mailboxes
On 4/26/20 6:41 PM, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
> Dnia 26.04.2020 o godz. 17:00:31 Richard Damon pisze:
>> I have never had GMail ask me to setup DMARC, they will ask you to setup
>> SPF or DKIM as a first step for delivery problems, as letting them
> Did you read https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:25:06AM +, Bandaru, Vamsi wrote:
> > LDAP auxprop plugin. Did you install it?
>
> Yes , these are the installed packages on my side for Cyrus-Sasl
>
> cyrus-sasl-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
> cyrus-sasl-devel-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_64
>
> cyrus-sasl-ldap-2.1.26-23.el7.x86_6
On 27/04/20 1:16 am, Ralph Seichter wrote:
* pe...@pajamian.dhs.org:
People may configure strict DMARC policies for various different
reasons, may be unaware of the issues that causes and may not even
have control over the domain at all.
Lack of knowledge is not an excuse, period. Lack of con
On 4/26/20 10:25 PM, Peter wrote:
>
> I prefer to be able to see a full conversation rather than having to
> hunt through my Spam folder for pieces of it.
>
>
> Peter
>
The solution for the GMail user is to just add a filter for messages
from the list and set the filter to bypass the spam filter, n
Hello Viktor ,
I am attatching the outputs of "Postconf -nf" and "Postconf -Mf" for your
persual , please excuse me if they look lame . : )
Thanks and Regards, Vamsi B.
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org On
Behalf Of Viktor Dukhovni
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020
On 27/04/20 2:02 am, Richard Damon wrote:
On 4/26/20 8:15 AM, Peter wrote:
On 27/04/20 12:00 am, Richard Damon wrote:
Except that if the sender is sending from a domain with an email policy
that effectively says, "This domain is intended to send sensitive
information, please do not accept messa
29 matches
Mail list logo
