Re: SPF technical problems (was Re: email address forgery)

Le mardi 16 novembre 2010 à 07:48 -0800, Marc Perkel a écrit : > > On 11/15/2010 10:25 AM, David F. Skoll wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 08:07:43 -1000 > > Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > > >> I use it just the same for the domains I have complete controm over.

Re: SPF technical problems (was Re: email address forgery)

I use it just the same for the domains I have complete controm over. Unfortunately, be aware that this setup maybe forbid your legitimate emails to be forwarded by a foreign host: let's say your authorized server sends email in your name to a remote mailbox (let's say Yahoo!), which is setup to f

Re: Yahoo webmail spam from Africa

Yes I got some 2 weeks ago. It was more phishing than spam. It was really targeted to my customers, asking them to provide login/passwords of their mailbox in order to avoid de-activation of their mailbox (of course not true). Here is a snippet of logs: Received: from [41.189.54.185] by web24614.m

Re: How do I get delisted from SORBS? [OT]

Le vendredi 08 octobre 2010 à 18:55 +0100, corpus.defero a écrit : > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 08:56 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > on getting delisted at SORBS. > > At least they give a time window :) Try to know why you're listed at > > barracuda: This is true pain

Re: How do I get delisted from SORBS? [OT]

Le jeudi 07 octobre 2010 à 16:33 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit : > * Marc Perkel : > > Got this listing on sorbs: > > > > SORBS DNSBL 127.0.0.2 "Aggregate > > zone See: http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?65.49.42.106"; > > http://www.de.sorbs.net/overview.shtm

Re: SORBS is definitely hosed today

I can't see any problem right now with SORBS... is it related to a specific Sorbs DNSBL? Le jeudi 07 octobre 2010 à 09:09 -0700, Marc Perkel a écrit : > Not sure what is happening but they appear to be down and when they > are up they have a lot of people blacklists that shouldn't be. I noticed

Re: DNSBL checks only on last untrusted host

Le vendredi 20 août 2010 à 20:34 +0200, Jacek Politowski a écrit : > On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 04:11:34PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote: > > >trusted_networks smarthost-ip/cidr > > > >here i exlude listed ips that are listed in some rbl, but clearly to > >me should not be listed, now you found such i

Re: How the hell barracuda behaves?

Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 11:27 -0700, Marc Perkel a écrit : > > On 8/18/2010 7:53 AM, Kris Deugau wrote: > > Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > >> When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl > >> are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries

Re: How the hell barracuda behaves?

Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 12:10 +0100, corpus.defero a écrit : > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: > > On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > > Hi the list, > > > > > > I am posting the results of my tests in order to

Re: How the hell barracuda behaves?

Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 13:39 -0400, Joseph Brennan a écrit : > The error message from Barracuda is broken too. Sample: > > > > ... while talking to barracuda.xprize.org.: > DATA > > <<< 554 Service unavailable; Client host [tarap.cc.columbia.edu] blocked > > using Barracuda Reputation;

Re: How the hell barracuda behaves?

Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell a écrit : > On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Hi the list, > > > > I am posting the results of my tests in order to have > > fedback/feelings/remarqs. > > This is not directly spamassassi

Re: How the hell barracuda behaves?

Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 10:53 -0400, Kris Deugau a écrit : > Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl > > are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries , barrcuda lists almost > > 8000 > > That&#x

How the hell barracuda behaves?

Hi the list, I am posting the results of my tests in order to have fedback/feelings/remarqs. This is not directly spamassassin related, but can be helpful for people (I saw here) wondering if they would used the barracuda DNSBL. the problem: - I have quite often complaints from my customers about

Re: thanks to thinking people.

mtp > server and spams the world with a forged senders > address. > > How exactly does Postfix "know" the difference between > Spammer and the internal user on the laptop at Starflucks? > > The notion of "bouncing mail to inside users" is a joke. > > Ted -- Alexandre Chapellon Mana SAS

Re: thanks to thinking people.

Le mardi 20 juillet 2010 à 18:56 -0600, LuKreme a écrit : > On Jul 20, 2010, at 18:07, Alexandre Chapellon > wrote: > > > Bouncing spam?? What a good way to become a backscatter source (in > > addition to spam)! > > We are talking about Checking OUTBOUND mess

Re: thanks to thinking people.

n addition to spam)! Definately not to be done! -- Alexandre Chapellon Mana SAS

Re: thanks to thinking people.

outbound mail. It is the other guy who is arguing that > spamfiltering outbound mail is better than port 25 blocks. > > Ted > > On 7/20/2010 11:46 AM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > You argue about the fficiency of blicking network flow like we do > > But beyond argue

Re: thanks to thinking people.

n 7/19/2010 12:56 PM, Brian Godette wrote: > >>> On 7/19/2010 1:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote: > >>>>> On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: &

thanks to thinking people.

help dudes, all I have to care about now is my mailservers configuration! -- Alexandre Chapellon Mana SAS

return-path program

Hello, I would like to know if someone here is part of the returnpath.net (http://www.returnpath.net/emailserviceprovider/certification/) certification program? Does it really increase deliverability of email and to which MSP? What are the necessary steps to get into that program and is it free or

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

I'd like to thank everybody for all the ideas spreaded around... This will give me good clues, differents axis of reflexion, and arguments for makers. Regards

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mercredi 17 février 2010 à 01:52 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit : > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 14:10 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 23:54 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit : > > > Where's the problem? You'll need to write some code

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mercredi 17 février 2010 à 02:07 +0100, Mark Martinec a écrit : > > > Look at grey-listing as well. It should be useful if it can distinguish > > > between the user's MUA (or private MTA) and a bot. > > MUAs generally don't cope well with greylisting, as they lack good > mechanisms for automat

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mercredi 17 février 2010 à 01:38 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 13:43 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 23:07 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > > > > Hmm, wait. Are you saying the bots are using your i

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 23:54 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit : > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 11:38 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 20:29 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit : > > > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 08:44 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: >

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 23:07 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 11:49 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > > >I have a quite buggy customer network, full of zombie PCs that > > > >spends all days sending spam and wasting t

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 12:46 -0800, SM a écrit : > Hi Alexandre, > At 10:44 16-02-10, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > >I have a quite buggy customer network, full of zombie PCs that > >spends all days sending spam and wasting the whole "reputation" of my > >

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

ity of customer. > > But the day will come that you will realize the majority of your > customers are using smtp-auth. And every day after that the > number of clients sending mail directly to port 25 will continue > to dwindle and you will become more and more interested in j

Re: SA on outgoing SMTP

Le mardi 16 février 2010 à 20:29 +, Martin Gregorie a écrit : > On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 08:44 -1000, Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Hello the list, > > > > I have a quite buggy customer network, full of zombie PCs that spends > > all days sending spam and wasting t

SA on outgoing SMTP

Hello the list, I have a quite buggy customer network, full of zombie PCs that spends all days sending spam and wasting the whole "reputation" of my networks. As a result it sometimes become quite hard to delivers queues for specific domains such as Yahoo!'s hosted ones. Indeed they have some temp

Re: multiple behaviour

Le lundi 21 mai 2007 à 09:12 -0400, Matt Kettler a écrit : > Alexandre Chapellon wrote: > > Hi the list > > > > I have a setup with SpamAssassin version 3.0.3 running on Perl version > > 5.8.4 (integrated with communigate pro). > > > > I would like SA to be

multiple behaviour

Hi the list I have a setup with SpamAssassin version 3.0.3 running on Perl version 5.8.4 (integrated with communigate pro). I would like SA to behave differently according to the score of the mail. I mean I would like mails to be silently discarded if the mail get an high score (e.g: 20) and only