You are seeing a failure case of some sort rather than an actual bounce and that needs trouble shooting
I hate to break it to you but this isn't a plot against your weird and wonderful notions of smtp and filtering - it is just those notions running up against a busy mailserver cluster --srs > On 14-Apr-2016, at 9:08 PM, an...@ox.co.za wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 20:52:30 +0530 > Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Post hoc ergo propter hoc > maybe... > > maybe if nobody cares what others are doing, then it all makes no > difference. > > but yet, when what others are doing affects your own wallet, then you > may actually care? > > When email is transported over the Internet servers understand how to > communicate with each other as their are defined protocols. > > These are not immutable laws, but they are and serve, as a method that > makes things work, and up to now, I believed in the fairness of it all. > > Basically, if I receive a bounce from gmail saying that they think my > email is spam, i sent the same bounce to my client - so that they can > fix / adjust their behavior... > > Looks like their is some seriosu new implications for email abuse, as > we are all now starting to re-write headers and Google is teaching us > this unethical and abusive behavior - by making it a defacto standard? > > So, I can now also start re-writing bounces saying : Gmail.com > Technical failure, gmail.com is completely unreachable o9n the > Internet, etc etc and if anyone and everyone is now going to start > sending lies and fake bounces then life is about to get interesting... > > When a company, which is very close to a monopoly already, grows their > userbase by lying to their customers, this is simply abuse in itself. > If I am wrong and it is not abuse, is it ethical? > > This is most assuredly a topic for this ripe wg > > as this type of abuse, if Google now starts making this a new standard, > has the effect of disrupting communications and other far reaching > implications commercially = or help me and explain to me why this is > okay and I am wrong, please? > > andre > > > > >> --srs >> >>> On 14-Apr-2016, at 8:38 PM, an...@ox.co.za wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 20:24:11 +0530 >>> Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I don't work for gmail fyi (as a quick google search will tell you, >>>> or a Bing if you hate google so much) and I don't use sorbs either, >>>> not since the late 2000s anyway. >>>> >>>> Without seeing a smtp txn with logging all the way up or a tcpdump >>>> I am not sure what is going on but a read error probably means >>>> you're dropping the smtp connection right after the 5xx without >>>> giving gmail the time to gracefully QUIT the smtp session. Or >>>> vice versa >>> >>> No. >>> >>> This is a gmail bounce to a gmail customer (for example my own gmail >>> account) >>> >>> nothing to do with @ox.co.za - except that @ox.co.za sends: >>> JunkMail rejected - is in an RBL, see Client host blocked using >>> Barracuda Reputation, see >>> http://www.barracudanetworks.com/reputation/?r=1 etc etc. >>> >>> so, when Gmail cannot deliver to @ox.co.za - because of dnsbl >>> (whether it is SORBS, SpamCop, SpamID.net or whomever, Gmail does >>> not tell the customer that the mail is being returned because just >>> a minute earlier google tried to drop 1000 phish on ox.co.za - >>> instead tells the customer: "read error" technical failure -- it is >>> not a technical failure at all! - it is simply that google is >>> sp[amming (or being used by their users to distribute spyware/phish >>> or whatever) and it is NOT A technical read error at all! >>> >>> >>> >>>> --srs >>>> >>>>> On 14-Apr-2016, at 8:05 PM, an...@ox.co.za wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:51:27 +0530 >>>>> Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> This isn't quite mailop but anyway - what specifically do you >>>>>> mean by replace here? >>>>> Yes, but is is an abuse wok group - it is important that the group >>>>> also discusses abuse, more so if their is abusive behavior from a >>>>> huge multinational. >>>>> >>>>>> Do you strip mime parts that you consider spam or malware and >>>>>> replace them with a suitable message? And is the gmail mta not >>>>>> reacting well to that? >>>>>> >>>>>> Examples would be interesting - certainly much more interesting >>>>>> than a vague rant. >>>>> Not a vague rant at all - the original post already contains the >>>>> information. Gmail is behaving poorly/abusively. >>>>> >>>>> maybe you require me to add additional information? - as there is >>>>> ZERO chance that you do not know what I am complaining about... >>>>> >>>>> I do wonder why you are not simply replying honestly and openly? >>>>> >>>>> ... Gmail customer sends email from Gmail to @ox.co.za >>>>> >>>>> ox.co.za responds: Listed at SORBS Currently sending SPAM! >>>>> >>>>> Gmail sends "improved" bounce report to Gmail customer: >>>>> >>>>> example: >>>>> >>>>>> Date: 14 April 2016 at 14:09:39 SAST >>>>>> To: custo...@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: >>>>>> >>>>>> an...@ox.co.za >>>>>> >>>>>> Technical details of permanent failure: >>>>>> read error: generic::failed_precondition: read error (0): error >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original message ----- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> --srs >>>>> >>>>> andre >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> On 14-Apr-2016, at 7:17 PM, an...@ox.co.za wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Incase anyone receives weird NON RFC bounces, from @gmail.com >>>>>>> customers saying: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Technical details of permanent failure: >>>>>>> read error: generic::failed_precondition: read error (0): error >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What this means is: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Google Inc does REPLACE the "Blocked for abuse / spam /scams / >>>>>>> phish / virus / spyware messages from the various filters >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and sens a cryptic non RFC message to their users implying that >>>>>>> the receivers email server is broken in some way.... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is truly EVIL of Google to do... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As they, Google are the ones sending PHISH / VIRUS/ SCAMS / >>>>>>> SPAM! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Example: @209.85.218.43 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.scammed.by/scam.php?id=185816 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Instead of SOLVING the abuse - Google chooses to send CRYPTIC >>>>>>> technical failure messages... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because they are a monopoly and they are simply just too large >>>>>>> to care?? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, of course! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andre >
