On 29/06/17 21:59, Lena--- via Exim-users wrote:
The Reply-To: header takes an address-list and is interpreted as such,
and IIRC used in that way by some mail-clients when subscribed to
mailing-lists but wanting personal copies of replies too. So the `rt:`
ACL is going to calculate something whi
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> Doing predictable lookups based upon the full email address, not just
> the domain, is drastically different from a privacy perspective. This
> is the sort of thing which is sensitive metadata with reasonable privacy
> expectations. Folks wh
On 2017-06-29 at 11:00 +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad via Exim-users wrote:
> There are DNS lookups for the sender and recipient domains, and in the
> case of spam filtering, there are often additional DNS lookups in
> DNSBLs for URIs found in the message content.
URIs, is a fair point, but privacy-focuse
On 2017-06-29 at 10:20 +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad via Exim-users wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> > There could stand to be some privacy implications discussion too --
> > you're sending out, over the wire in unencrypted DNS packets, a
> > predictable derivation of the R
> The Reply-To: header takes an address-list and is interpreted as such,
> and IIRC used in that way by some mail-clients when subscribed to
> mailing-lists but wanting personal copies of replies too. So the `rt:`
> ACL is going to calculate something which will emit bogus queries to an
> external
On 29/06/17 10:00, Jan Ingvoldstad via Exim-users wrote:
> Just look at the DNSSEC uptake. DNS over TLS is not going to happen
> soon enough to make a difference here.
If we never provide the tools, that'll be self-fulfilling.
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/ma
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> On 28/06/17 20:27, Phil Pennock wrote:
>> There could stand to be some privacy implications discussion too --
>> you're sending out, over the wire in unencrypted DNS packets, a
>> predictable derivation of the Reply-To: header received for e
On 28/06/17 20:27, Phil Pennock wrote:
> There could stand to be some privacy implications discussion too --
> you're sending out, over the wire in unencrypted DNS packets, a
> predictable derivation of the Reply-To: header received for every email
> from a given domain.
Perhaps we need DNS-over-T
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> There could stand to be some privacy implications discussion too --
> you're sending out, over the wire in unencrypted DNS packets, a
> predictable derivation of the Reply-To: header received for every email
> from a given domain. Using a cry
On 2017-06-28 at 18:19 +0300, Lena--- via Exim-users wrote:
> How to use EBL in Exim config (requires Exim version 4.87 or higher):
> https://github.com/Exim/exim/wiki/EBL
Looks potentially useful.
The Reply-To: header takes an address-list and is interpreted as such,
and IIRC used in that way by
The purpose of the EBL blacklist is described on
http://msbl.org/ebl-purpose.htm
I tested EBL since October 2016, today it was declared in public beta:
https://spammers.dontlike.us/mailman/private/list/2017-June/010493.html
> The Email Blocklist has entered Beta 2, and is now open for testing by
11 matches
Mail list logo