myself wrote:
> No, there currently is no way to distinguish a temporary failure
> (e.g. a timeout due to network problems) from other DNS failures
> in SpamAssassin's DKIM plugin.
On the other hand, this isn't too bad. A DKIM validity is commonly
associated with whitelisting or reputation, so a
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On tir 21 dec 2010 18:39:52 CET, Randy Ramsdell wrote
It appears mycingular ( iphone ) ips are listed on spamhaus ( XBL
and PBL ) for 8 days. I have reject at the smtpd level if found.
May want to look out for this.
iphone ?
if mobile phones not using smtp auth it wi
On tir 21 dec 2010 18:39:52 CET, Randy Ramsdell wrote
> It appears mycingular ( iphone ) ips are listed on spamhaus ( XBL
> and PBL ) for 8 days. I have reject at the smtpd level if found.
>
> May want to look out for this.
iphone ?
if mobile phones not using smtp auth it will fail, have no pr
On 12/21/10 12:39 PM, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
It appears mycingular ( iphone ) ips are listed on spamhaus ( XBL and
PBL ) for 8 days. I have reject at the smtpd level if found.
May want to look out for this.
Thanks,
RCR
Good.
you should not be sending email directly from your iphone or mifi.
It appears mycingular ( iphone ) ips are listed on spamhaus ( XBL and
PBL ) for 8 days. I have reject at the smtpd level if found.
May want to look out for this.
Thanks,
RCR
On Tuesday December 21 2010 08:45:03 Per Jessen wrote:
> I think I must have asked this before, so I must have forgotten the
> answer - is there any way of distinguising between "DKIM verification
> negative" and "DKIM could not verify"?
No, there currently is no way to distinguish a temporary fai
>> On 2010/12/17 11:47 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>> And what prevents a spammer from forging this into a header and
>>> bypassing SA? Just askin.
> On 12/17/2010 8:51 AM, Jason Bertoch wrote:
>> Without checking, I'd guess that matching an authentication header with
>> an address in trusted_net
