Am 11.12.2015 um 17:11 schrieb Alex:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
On 10.12.15 22:54, Alex wrote:
I don't understand why a message from tripadvisor.com would have
SPF_FAIL, and as part of trying to understand how SPF works, I'd like
to figure out what's happ
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
>> On 10.12.15 22:54, Alex wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't understand why a message from tripadvisor.com would have
>>> SPF_FAIL, and as part of trying to understand how SPF works, I'd like
>>> to figure out what's happening.
>>>
>>> Woul
On 10.12.15 22:54, Alex wrote:
I don't understand why a message from tripadvisor.com would have
SPF_FAIL, and as part of trying to understand how SPF works, I'd like
to figure out what's happening.
Would someone be able to take a look at this message and figure out
why mail from tripadvisor.com
Am 11.12.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
I don't understand why a message from tripadvisor.com would have
SPF_FAIL, and as part of trying to understand how SPF works, I'd like
to figure out what's happening.
Would someone be able to take a look at this message and figure out
why
> My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been
> removed from the thread now:
> > > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered
> > > > > > > > > when an incoming email using my domain is received by a server
> >
> > > > > > > that is not in my
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:28 AM, John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
>>> > My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been
>>> > removed from the thread now:
>>> > > > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be trigg
On December 10, 2015 3:49:56 PM Alex wrote:
whitelist_from_spf: *@example.tld (your domain)
header Return-Path =~ example.tld
That's great. I'll investigate.
or blacklist_from *@* with whitelist_auth *@* to hate all equal :)
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Alex skrev den 2015-12-10 03:42:
>
>> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
>> against my domain, how would I do that?
>> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my
>> domain to do this?
>
> setup pypolicyd-spf is not
On Dec 10, 2015 at 16:13 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
=>Am 10.12.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Alex:
=>> I thought it was related to the sending domain, which it was, but I
=>> later learned one of the includes in our domain was also apparently
=>> expanded, and caused our SPF record to temporarily exceed
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> My response was based on how you worded your question, which has been
> removed from the thread now:
>
> > > > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered
> > > > when an incoming email using my domain is received by a
Am 10.12.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Alex:
Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when >
> > an incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is >
> > not in
> > my SPF record.
The SPF fail SHOULD be triggered in that case. But in your first mail you
hav
Am 10.12.2015 um 15:47 schrieb Alex:
data in spf must be with all mynetworks in postfix except all non routeble
ips such as rfc1918 in the spf for mydestination and virtual domains
Doesn't that introduce a trust issue with include: for example? We're
including constant-contact, salesforce, et
Am 10.12.2015 um 15:43 schrieb Alex:
Hi,
If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
against my domain, how would I do that?
Simply put all approved mail servers that you allow to send email with an
envelope-from domain of your domain in your SPF record and it won't
ma
Hi,
> > Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when >
> > >
> > an incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is >
> > not in
> > my SPF record.
>
> The SPF fail SHOULD be triggered in that case. But in your first mail you
> have mentioned T_SPF_PERMERROR
Hi,
>> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
>> against my domain, how would I do that?
>>
>> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my
>> domain to do this?
>
> This all sounds like:
>
> I (Alex) want to use SPF for incoming email, and scor
Hi,
>> If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
>> against my domain, how would I do that?
>> Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my
>> domain to do this?
>
> setup pypolicyd-spf is not that hard is it ?
I mentioned previously that there we
Hi,
>>If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
>>against my domain, how would I do that?
>
> Simply put all approved mail servers that you allow to send email with an
> envelope-from domain of your domain in your SPF record and it won't
> matter what the receiving server i
Yes, understood. This was always about my own MTA receiving a message
appearing to be "FROM" my own domain, and my own SPF record would be
used to check the IP of the remote system to determine if it was
permitted. I may have made that especially clear at one point.
Does this make sense now? I'm
Am 10.12.2015 um 03:42 schrieb Alex:
If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
against my domain, how would I do that?
Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my
domain to do this?
SPF *is not* about the From-Header
signature.asc
Descrip
On 10-12-15 03:42, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> Yes, understood. This was always about my own MTA receiving a message
>>> appearing to be "FROM" my own domain, and my own SPF record would be
>>> used to check the IP of the remote system to determine if it was
>>> permitted. I may have made that espec
Alex skrev den 2015-12-10 03:42:
If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
against my domain, how would I do that?
Can I create a meta that combines SPF_FAIL with the From header for my
domain to do this?
setup pypolicyd-spf is not that hard is it ?
when done, you just
>Spamassassin is just going to record a generic SPF_FAIL, regardless of
>whether it's my SPF record or an email from some other domain.
>If I wanted to use SPF in spamassassin to block spoofing attempts
>against my domain, how would I do that?
Simply put all approved mail servers that you allow t
Hi,
>> Yes, understood. This was always about my own MTA receiving a message
>> appearing to be "FROM" my own domain, and my own SPF record would be
>> used to check the IP of the remote system to determine if it was
>> permitted. I may have made that especially clear at one point.
>>
>> Does this
On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Alex wrote:
I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
SPF says nothing about the *recipient* MTA.
Unless that recipient MTA is my own, correct?
No. The recipient *does not matter*. SPF is vetting the *sending* MTA.
The SPF record contains a list
Hi,
>>> I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
>>>
>>> SPF says nothing about the *recipient* MTA.
>>
>>
>> Unless that recipient MTA is my own, correct?
>
> No. The recipient *does not matter*. SPF is vetting the *sending* MTA.
>
>> The SPF record contains a list of ser
Am 09.12.2015 um 18:25 schrieb Alex:
Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when an
incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is not in
my SPF record.
I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
SPF says nothing about the *recipi
On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Alex wrote:
Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when an
incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is not in
my SPF record.
I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
SPF says nothing about the *recipient* M
>> Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when an
>> incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is not in
>> my SPF record.
>
> I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
>
> SPF says nothing about the *recipient* MTA.
Unless that reci
On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Alex wrote:
Please help me understand why SPF_FAIL would not be triggered when an
incoming email using my domain is received by a server that is not in
my SPF record.
I think you mean, *FROM* a server that is not in your SPF record.
SPF says nothing about the *recipient* M
Am 09.12.2015 um 17:30 schrieb Alex:
Hi,
My main problem is understanding how to build a rule to block spoofing
attempts against my own domain? Do I need to build a meta that
combines envelope FROM with SPF_FAIL?
first: spoofing protection is *only* about envelope and not about the
visible
Hi,
>> My main problem is understanding how to build a rule to block spoofing
>> attempts against my own domain? Do I need to build a meta that
>> combines envelope FROM with SPF_FAIL?
>
> first: spoofing protection is *only* about envelope and not about the
> visible From-header (spoofing protect
On Wed, 2015-12-09 at 09:44 -0500, Alex wrote:
> My main problem is understanding how to build a rule to block
> spoofing attempts against my own domain? Do I need to build a meta
> that combines envelope FROM with SPF_FAIL?
>
Don't forget that SPF fails and errors will always be related to the
*
Am 09.12.2015 um 15:44 schrieb Alex:
T_SPF_PERMERROR says pretty clear that you made something wrong
why do people not *verify* DNS changes? seen the same from a
lot of large companies
http://www.kitterman.com/spf/validate.html
+1 for the Kitterman checking tool - still my first stop for SPF
Hi,
>> T_SPF_PERMERROR says pretty clear that you made something wrong
>> why do people not *verify* DNS changes? seen the same from a
>> lot of large companies
>>
>> http://www.kitterman.com/spf/validate.html
>>
> +1 for the Kitterman checking tool - still my first stop for SPF
> checking.
>
> I
On Wed, 2015-12-09 at 08:11 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> T_SPF_PERMERROR says pretty clear that you made something wrong
> why do people not *verify* DNS changes? seen the same from a
> lot of large companies
>
> http://www.kitterman.com/spf/validate.html
>
+1 for the Kitterman checking tool
Am 09.12.2015 um 05:03 schrieb Alex:
I'm having some problems with SPF and hoped someone could help me to
understand. I've just set up SPF for a domain and now trying to make
sure that spamassassin for that domain is properly blocking/scoring
mail attempting to spoof the envelope sender.
I'm s
My question has been misunderstood as commentary on SPF, etc.
It is not about SPF, I'm just trying to steer the question towards a
spamassassin tag that can be triggered.
I found a solution with my own rule.
I wasn't sure whether the SA rules referring to 'from' header were
actually meaning sender
On 12. feb. 2015 20.17.44 Dave Warren wrote:
However, using a DMARC "quarantine" or "reject" policy causes breakage
when users attempt to participate in discussion based mailing lists, or
other systems which modify messages (adding subject tags, adding
footers, removing existing signatures), so
On 2015-02-12 11:27, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 15:07 -0400, francis picabia wrote:
SPF works as designed. Forget SPF.
Quite: the only real use for SPF is to prevent you inadvertently
spraying innocent people with backscatter. If the sender has been forged
by a spammer and y
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 15:07 -0400, francis picabia wrote:
> SPF works as designed. Forget SPF.
>
Quite: the only real use for SPF is to prevent you inadvertently
spraying innocent people with backscatter. If the sender has been forged
by a spammer and your MTA can't deliver it (usually because the
On 2015-02-12 08:17, francis picabia wrote:
Our spamassassin 3.3.1 is marking email with tags like and
SPF_SOFTFAIL and SPF_FAIL, as long as the sender info
is failing the SPF test. But if the sender passes the test
and the From: address is from our domain, then there
are no SPF tags appearing.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On 12. feb. 2015 17.40.13 "Kevin A. McGrail" wrote:
>
>> Spf deals with the envelope sender not the from address.
>
>
> envelope_sender_header From
>
> bad example to follow, it not really a spf question, sender-id is the
> untrusted versio
On 12. feb. 2015 17.40.13 "Kevin A. McGrail" wrote:
Spf deals with the envelope sender not the from address.
envelope_sender_header From
bad example to follow, it not really a spf question, sender-id is the
untrusted version of dkim
current dmarc rfc have design faults :(
Am 12.02.2015 um 17:58 schrieb francis picabia:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Spf deals with the envelope sender not the from address.
Beyond that it, you might find dkim to be a better solution to prevent
others spoofing your domain.
Thanks for the reply. Has a
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Spf deals with the envelope sender not the from address.
>
> Beyond that it, you might find dkim to be a better solution to prevent
> others spoofing your domain.
> Regards,
> KAM
>
Thanks for the reply. Has anyone tried a test like the
Am 12.02.2015 um 17:17 schrieb francis picabia:
Our spamassassin 3.3.1 is marking email with tags like and
SPF_SOFTFAIL and SPF_FAIL, as long as the sender info
is failing the SPF test. But if the sender passes the test
and the From: address is from our domain, then there
are no SPF tags appear
Spf deals with the envelope sender not the from address.
Beyond that it, you might find dkim to be a better solution to prevent others
spoofing your domain.
Regards,
KAM
On February 12, 2015 11:17:38 AM EST, francis picabia
wrote:
>Our spamassassin 3.3.1 is marking email with tags like and
>
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, October 2, 2008 16:28, Ray Jette wrote:
Good morning,
evening here :)
it keeps changing here :)
The SPF_PASS and SPF_HELO_PASS rules hit several hundred messages a day.
I am doing SPF lockup's at the MTA. How do I go about stopping these
tests from within SA
On Thu, October 2, 2008 16:28, Ray Jette wrote:
> Good morning,
evening here :)
> The SPF_PASS and SPF_HELO_PASS rules hit several hundred messages a day.
> I am doing SPF lockup's at the MTA. How do I go about stopping these
> tests from within SA?
perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf
perldoc Mail
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Of course, PASS tells nothing, but
there are *FAIL, NEUTRAL etc.
Actually, PASS can tell you quite a bit if you're trying to whitelist a
specific address or domain (eg. whitelist_from_spf).
--
Kelson Vibber
SpeedGate Communications
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 10:57 -0400, Ray Jette wrote:
> Thanks for the quick reply. Do you know what .pre file this is contained
> in? From the /etc/spamassassin directory I ran the following:
> grep SPF_PASS *.pre but came up with nothing.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] spamassassin]$ grep -i -C 1 spf *.pre
ini
> On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 10:28 -0400, Ray Jette wrote:
> > Good morning,
> > The SPF_PASS and SPF_HELO_PASS rules hit several hundred messages a day.
> > I am doing SPF lockup's at the MTA. How do I go about stopping these
> > tests from within SA?
On 02.10.08 09:44, McDonald, Dan wrote:
> score SP
Thanks for the quick reply. Do you know what .pre file this is contained
in? From the /etc/spamassassin directory I ran the following:
grep SPF_PASS *.pre but came up with nothing.
Thanks.
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 09:44 -0500, McDonald, Dan wrote:
> or just remove the module from the .pre file that
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 10:28 -0400, Ray Jette wrote:
> Good morning,
> The SPF_PASS and SPF_HELO_PASS rules hit several hundred messages a day.
> I am doing SPF lockup's at the MTA. How do I go about stopping these
> tests from within SA?
score SPF_PASS 0
score SPF_HELO_PASS 0
or just remove the m
On 02.10.08 10:28, Ray Jette wrote:
> The SPF_PASS and SPF_HELO_PASS rules hit several hundred messages a day.
> I am doing SPF lockup's at the MTA. How do I go about stopping these
> tests from within SA?
if your MTA pushes Received-SPF: headers to the mail, the SA will use it.
There are still m
55 matches
Mail list logo
