>From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>> Seems to me like
>>Yahoo doesn't have a good list of IPs so they took this shortcut
>>which is technically legitimate but it's making up for their incompetence
>>not having a handle on their mail flow.
>That doesn't mean incompetence. using PTR is official way,
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Still no practical difference between using IP ranges or rdns in SPF.
On 28.01.17 14:27, David Jones wrote:
Most SPF records published are not like this.
so... what?
Seems to me like
Yahoo doesn't have a good list of IPs so they took this shortcut
which is tec
>From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>Still no practical difference between using IP ranges or rdns in SPF.
Most SPF records published are not like this. Seems to me like
Yahoo doesn't have a good list of IPs so they took this shortcut
which is technically legitimate but it's making up for their incom
Am 27.01.2017 um 17:57 schrieb David Jones:
>if you have trouble to get large providers past postscreen your rbl mix
>or scoring is just plain wrong
>configure postscreen proper and adjust RBL scores in spamassassin to get
>the rest killed, we are using the same DNSBL/DNSWL in postscreen and
>spa
SpamAssassin caught this phish, however some tweaks would have
let it thru, and it's an interesting new (to me) approach, so I
figured I'd share it with y'all.
Full raw spample (with MUNGED email addresses):
http://puffin.net/software/spam/samples/0053_phish_image.txt
At arrival time, the
