Postini
I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
postini & backscatter
I have a client whos been using postini for quite some time, about 100 mailboxes, and recently has been noticing a lot of backscatter sitting in his queues. Now, from the few times I used postini, you setup a mailbox on their system and then it redirects mail. So he shouldn't be sending out ndr's to people who don't exist because the mail should never get to his server. Im going to check the firewall, which has been set to only allow smtp/25 from the postini ip range. Im also wondering if this could be from his bes server he setup in the past couple of months, that maybe its coming from the phones? Or he has a virus internally, which I doubt, but we are doing a full scan and going through smtp logs now. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Postini
"How do we de-google ourselves?" From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? pdc1
RE: Postini
That's basically what I am being asked. They weren't happy that we didn't have a "quick" solution to start getting mail routed another way yesterday From: William Lefkovics [mailto:will...@lefkovics.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini "How do we de-google ourselves?" From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? pdc1 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
RE: Postini
You don't have control over your DNS? That's what I did for my clients. Just routed them directly... From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini That’s basically what I am being asked. They weren’t happy that we didn’t have a “quick” solution to start getting mail routed another way yesterday From: William Lefkovics [mailto:will...@lefkovics.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini “How do we de-google ourselves?” From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? pdc1 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
RE: Postini
We do, but we would have to direct traffic directly to us, and we don't have the capacity to handle the traffic, or the spam filtering capabilities in house. It would have ended poorly. A quick check shows that we receive about 600,000 messages in total a day, with only 20 percent of those actually making it through to us. Adding all that traffic to our network would have been a bigger issue From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini You don't have control over your DNS? That's what I did for my clients. Just routed them directly... From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini That's basically what I am being asked. They weren't happy that we didn't have a "quick" solution to start getting mail routed another way yesterday From: William Lefkovics [mailto:will...@lefkovics.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini "How do we de-google ourselves?" From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? pdc1 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
Re: Postini
Hi everyone, We had a problem about 3 months ago where our Exchange 2007 server with the Hub Transport role, which sends out using a Postini send connector stopped working because it temporarily lost its DNS settings for some bizarre reason. So yesterday, when my Exchange server again stopped sending out on the Postini send connector I found myself troubleshooting this and eventually decided just to route out using MX lookups (just to get emails out). I had no contact from Postini. Was there an official announcement yesterday? What was the problem and is it fixed? Thanks a lot. Andrew 2009/10/14 Wulff Jr, Ronald J. > We do, but we would have to direct traffic directly to us, and we don’t > have the capacity to handle the traffic, or the spam filtering capabilities > in house. It would have ended poorly. A quick check shows that we receive > about 600,000 messages in total a day, with only 20 percent of those > actually making it through to us. Adding all that traffic to our network > would have been a bigger issue > > > > > > > > *From:* Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:27 AM > > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Postini > > > > You don't have control over your DNS? > > > > That's what I did for my clients. Just routed them directly... > > > -- > > *From:* Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [rwu...@reedsmith.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:22 AM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Postini > > That’s basically what I am being asked. They weren’t happy that we didn’t > have a “quick” solution to start getting mail routed another way yesterday > > > > > > > > *From:* William Lefkovics [mailto:will...@lefkovics.net] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:15 AM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Postini > > > > “How do we de-google ourselves?” > > > > > > *From:* Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* Postini > > > > I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question > from management today after their incident yesterday? > > > > > > pdc1 > > > > * * * > > > > This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may > well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on > notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then > delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for > any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for > your cooperation. > > * * * > > To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you > that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice > contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended > or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding > penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local > provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any > tax-related matters addressed herein. > > Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 > > pdc1 >
RE: Postini
Here is the official notice we received Ron, We experienced an issue that caused significant delays to inbound mail delivery for users on System 7. Postini Engineering and Operations have resolved the issue, and mail delivery rates have returned to normal. Engineering and Operations continue to closer monitor the situation. During this incident, incoming messages may have been deferred; no messages were bounced or deleted. Some sending mail servers may have returned a "failed delivery" notification after four hours, but continued to try to resend deferred messages (up to five days for a typical configuration). Outbound mail delivery and filtering performed as normal during this time. We realize the importance of email to customers, and sincerely apologize for the impact to your organization and users. We will send you a case update which includes the root cause analysis and corrective and preventative actions, within the next 48 business hours. From: Andrew Levicki [mailto:and...@levicki.me.uk] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:47 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Hi everyone, We had a problem about 3 months ago where our Exchange 2007 server with the Hub Transport role, which sends out using a Postini send connector stopped working because it temporarily lost its DNS settings for some bizarre reason. So yesterday, when my Exchange server again stopped sending out on the Postini send connector I found myself troubleshooting this and eventually decided just to route out using MX lookups (just to get emails out). I had no contact from Postini. Was there an official announcement yesterday? What was the problem and is it fixed? Thanks a lot. Andrew 2009/10/14 Wulff Jr, Ronald J. We do, but we would have to direct traffic directly to us, and we don't have the capacity to handle the traffic, or the spam filtering capabilities in house. It would have ended poorly. A quick check shows that we receive about 600,000 messages in total a day, with only 20 percent of those actually making it through to us. Adding all that traffic to our network would have been a bigger issue From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini You don't have control over your DNS? That's what I did for my clients. Just routed them directly... From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini That's basically what I am being asked. They weren't happy that we didn't have a "quick" solution to start getting mail routed another way yesterday From: William Lefkovics [mailto:will...@lefkovics.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini "How do we de-google ourselves?" From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 4:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I am going to light them on fire. Anyone else getting a lot of question from management today after their incident yesterday? pdc1 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
Re: Postini
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > We experienced an issue that caused significant delays to inbound mail > delivery for users on System 7. "System 7"? Google's running Postini on a classic Macintosh? ;-) -- Ben
RE: Postini
That would explain the outage lol -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 8:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > We experienced an issue that caused significant delays to inbound mail > delivery for users on System 7. "System 7"? Google's running Postini on a classic Macintosh? ;-) -- Ben * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
Contact @ Postini
Hi folks, Anyone have any contacts @ Google/Postini that I can actually contact via phone? All they have on the web is a form which no one seems to ever reply to. Thanks!
RE: Postini
Typically the server is set up to only talk to Postini in and out. Dns all pointed to postini. Very poor to no cust service. I used to have the setup doc around but I can't seem to find it. Bet you could download it from them.. M From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 8:39 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer consolidation where Postini is involved - My question - Can I do per user email routing with Postini? Example b...@bob.com is routed to mail.bob.com f...@bob.com is routed to mail.fredco.com sa...@bob.com is routed to coolserver.bob.com --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Postini
Yes but you'll configure routing within GoogleApps\Users & Organizations\groups. Very easy. On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:39 AM, KevinM wrote: > I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer > consolidation where Postini is involved – > > > > My question – Can I do per user email routing with Postini? > > Example > > b...@bob.com is routed to mail.bob.com > > f...@bob.com is routed to mail.fredco.com > > sa...@bob.com is routed to coolserver.bob.com > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com > with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist > --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Postini
Postini used to have pretty good customer service, at least in Europe... US management and then finally Google killed off the team though which was a real shame. From: Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] Sent: 11 May 2011 18:56 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Typically the server is set up to only talk to Postini in and out. Dns all pointed to postini. Very poor to no cust service. I used to have the setup doc around but I can't seem to find it. Bet you could download it from them M From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 8:39 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer consolidation where Postini is involved - My question - Can I do per user email routing with Postini? Example b...@bob.com<mailto:b...@bob.com> is routed to mail.bob.com f...@bob.com<mailto:f...@bob.com> is routed to mail.fredco.com sa...@bob.com<mailto:sa...@bob.com> is routed to coolserver.bob.com --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com<mailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com> with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist This electronic message contains information from CACI International Inc or subsidiary companies, which may be confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, be aware that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at postmas...@caci.co.uk Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. CACI Limited. Registered in England & Wales. Registration No. 1649776. CACI House, Avonmore Road, London, W14 8TS. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Postini
Not to keep the bash train rolling, but. We migrated a daughter company at my last gig to Postini, consisting of ~200 users. Once we found out they either lied or left out important info regarding services supported/not supported, we cancelled the migration of our parent company (4000+ users). Don Guyer Windows Systems Engineer RIM Operations Engineering Distributed - A Team, Tier 2 Enterprise Technology Group Fiserv don.gu...@fiserv.com Office: 1-800-523-7282 x 1673 Fax: 610-233-0404 www.fiserv.com <http://www.fiserv.com/> From: Nicholas Turner [mailto:ntur...@caci.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 4:47 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Postini used to have pretty good customer service, at least in Europe... US management and then finally Google killed off the team though which was a real shame. From: Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] Sent: 11 May 2011 18:56 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Typically the server is set up to only talk to Postini in and out. Dns all pointed to postini. Very poor to no cust service. I used to have the setup doc around but I can't seem to find it. Bet you could download it from them M From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 8:39 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer consolidation where Postini is involved - My question - Can I do per user email routing with Postini? Example b...@bob.com is routed to mail.bob.com f...@bob.com is routed to mail.fredco.com sa...@bob.com is routed to coolserver.bob.com --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist This electronic message contains information from CACI International Inc or subsidiary companies, which may be confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, be aware that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at postmas...@caci.co.uk Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. CACI Limited. Registered in England & Wales. Registration No. 1649776. CACI House, Avonmore Road, London, W14 8TS. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Exchange 2007 & Postini
Any Exchange / Postini users out there? We're a new client to them--we signed up for the archiving service. I'm trying to get my outbound mail routing through them, but am having no luck. Tech support seems stumped, too. I'm using the private DNS method, where you configure Exchange to use a specific DNS server to resolve addresses for messages bound for the outside world. You point it to Postini's server, which will resolve every address to their system. Exchange sends the mail to them, then they do their thing (virus scanning, stamping with footer, etc.) and send it on to its real destination. What's happening is that when I configure Exchange 2007 to use their server, my mail piles up in the queue and never goes out. For kicks, I dropped to a command prompt on my server and ran nslookup, pointing it to Postini's DNS server. I was able to connect, but not resolve any host names. Every time I tried, I got a "query refused" message. Anyone seen this before? Any ideas as to whether this is an issue on my end, or theirs? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: postini & backscatter
Our Corp uses Postini and I can with out a doubt it's the worst 3rd party spam filter I've ever been involved with. They lose trouble tickets and take a long time to address any issues and by the time they do all they ever say is it's not us. Many issues with Customers not able to send through them even after they've been added to the white list. Google and your companies data Is it really safe? - Original Message - From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:32 AM Subject: postini & backscatter I have a client whos been using postini for quite some time, about 100 mailboxes, and recently has been noticing a lot of backscatter sitting in his queues. Now, from the few times I used postini, you setup a mailbox on their system and then it redirects mail. So he shouldn't be sending out ndr's to people who don't exist because the mail should never get to his server. Im going to check the firewall, which has been set to only allow smtp/25 from the postini ip range. Im also wondering if this could be from his bes server he setup in the past couple of months, that maybe its coming from the phones? Or he has a virus internally, which I doubt, but we are doing a full scan and going through smtp logs now. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: postini & backscatter
Don't see how it could be the BES - all that does is act like a client to the mailbox server. From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: postini & backscatter I have a client whos been using postini for quite some time, about 100 mailboxes, and recently has been noticing a lot of backscatter sitting in his queues. Now, from the few times I used postini, you setup a mailbox on their system and then it redirects mail. So he shouldn't be sending out ndr's to people who don't exist because the mail should never get to his server. Im going to check the firewall, which has been set to only allow smtp/25 from the postini ip range. Im also wondering if this could be from his bes server he setup in the past couple of months, that maybe its coming from the phones? Or he has a virus internally, which I doubt, but we are doing a full scan and going through smtp logs now. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: postini & backscatter
Postini gives you a configuration option to "pass through" or to "bounce" unknown addresses. By default, it is configured to pass through. Postini charges based on per-account filtered (which includes some number of aliases; it's either 5 or 10, I can't remember off the top of my head) and they have to be configured (or synced - the sync-tool for postini is pretty powerful actually). Almost certainly, that's what is going on. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange From: Don Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:37 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: postini & backscatter Don't see how it could be the BES - all that does is act like a client to the mailbox server. _ From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: postini & backscatter I have a client whos been using postini for quite some time, about 100 mailboxes, and recently has been noticing a lot of backscatter sitting in his queues. Now, from the few times I used postini, you setup a mailbox on their system and then it redirects mail. So he shouldn't be sending out ndr's to people who don't exist because the mail should never get to his server. Im going to check the firewall, which has been set to only allow smtp/25 from the postini ip range. Im also wondering if this could be from his bes server he setup in the past couple of months, that maybe its coming from the phones? Or he has a virus internally, which I doubt, but we are doing a full scan and going through smtp logs now. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
OT: Postini Quarantine
I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: [cid:image001.png@01CA525B.04C5E4A0] Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com <mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer wrote: > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* OT: Postini Quarantine > > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we experienced with Postini. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com <mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer wrote: We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
We use IronPort. Wound up costing us much less to go down that road... On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Jonathan Link wrote: > And what are you using now? > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer wrote: > >> We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. >> >> >> >> Don Guyer >> >> Systems Engineer - Information Services >> >> Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group >> >> 431 W. Lancaster Avenue >> >> Devon, PA 19333 >> >> Direct: (610) 993-3299 >> >> Fax: (610) 650-5306 >> >> don.gu...@prufoxroach.com >> >> >> >> *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* OT: Postini Quarantine >> >> >> >> I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering >> if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: >> >> >> >> >> >> Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of >> thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re >> very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. >> >> >> >> I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles >> with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say >> something about them making some changes on their end, and something else >> about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to >> think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t >> making it into my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, >> and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary >> generally has 150 or so messages in it). >> >> >> >> So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar >> results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> John Hornbuckle >> >> MIS Department >> >> Taylor County School District >> >> 318 North Clark Street >> >> Perry, FL 32347 >> >> >> >> www.taylor.k12.fl.us >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications >> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the >> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to >> public disclosure. >> >> > <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we experienced with Postini. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: [cid:image001.png@01CA525D.BE609FC0] Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
"And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." U, what? Really? Wow... On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle < john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than > Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. > > > > The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup > (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. > > > > Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. > > > > I’ve got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road > between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would’ve thought that was okay. > I’ve just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a > difference. I don’t want to get too aggressive, though… > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > *From:* Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Postini Quarantine > > > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we > experienced with Postini. > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > *From:* Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Postini Quarantine > > > > And what are you using now? > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer > wrote: > > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* OT: Postini Quarantine > > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
We started off with MXLogic's archiving service and cut that part out due to issues, leaving just the SPAM filtering. Different company, but again we couldn't get 100% of what they told us they could do. Efficiently and without recurring issues, at least. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com <mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:53 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we experienced with Postini. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer wrote: We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us <http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
You must, too-at least to some degree, since you're writing from a Gmail address. :) From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine "And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." U, what? Really? Wow... On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> wrote: We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we experienced with Postini. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: [cid:image001.png@01CA5260.FF836660] Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
You'll probably want to Blackhole obvious spam, and this will prevent 70% or more from even hitting the remaining filters. Roger Wright ___ Sent from Tampa, FL, United States On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM, John Hornbuckle < john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than > Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. > > > > The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup > (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. > > > > Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. > > > > I’ve got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road > between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would’ve thought that was okay. > I’ve just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a > difference. I don’t want to get too aggressive, though… > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > *From:* Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM > > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Postini Quarantine > > > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we > experienced with Postini. > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > *From:* Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM > > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Postini Quarantine > > > > And what are you using now? > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer > wrote: > > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > > > Don Guyer > > Systems Engineer - Information Services > > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > > Devon, PA 19333 > > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com > > > > *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* OT: Postini Quarantine > > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
I'm having similar issues with Postini. I suppose i should upgrade filtering organization wide to Aggressive. It's been ok for the past year, but within the past month i've seen a lot come through, not many FP's to report though. It's SPAM, nothing is 100% full-proof and Postini is one less service i have to manage/monitor/backup which means i have more time and resources at hand to focus on items that require as much. Although i would be interested to see if MXLogic is cheaper these days than Positini. Harry. On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Roger Wright wrote: > You'll probably want to Blackhole obvious spam, and this will prevent 70% > or more from even hitting the remaining filters. > > Roger Wright > ___ > > Sent from Tampa, FL, United States > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM, John Hornbuckle < > john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > >> We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than >> Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. >> >> >> >> The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup >> (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. >> >> >> >> Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. >> >> >> >> I’ve got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road >> between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would’ve thought that was okay. >> I’ve just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a >> difference. I don’t want to get too aggressive, though… >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> John Hornbuckle >> >> MIS Department >> >> Taylor County School District >> >> 318 North Clark Street >> >> Perry, FL 32347 >> >> >> >> www.taylor.k12.fl.us >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* RE: Postini Quarantine >> >> >> >> MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like >> we experienced with Postini. >> >> >> >> Don Guyer >> >> Systems Engineer - Information Services >> >> Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group >> >> 431 W. Lancaster Avenue >> >> Devon, PA 19333 >> >> Direct: (610) 993-3299 >> >> Fax: (610) 650-5306 >> >> don.gu...@prufoxroach.com >> >> >> >> *From:* Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM >> >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* Re: Postini Quarantine >> >> >> >> And what are you using now? >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer >> wrote: >> >> We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. >> >> >> >> Don Guyer >> >> Systems Engineer - Information Services >> >> Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group >> >> 431 W. Lancaster Avenue >> >> Devon, PA 19333 >> >> Direct: (610) 993-3299 >> >> Fax: (610) 650-5306 >> >> don.gu...@prufoxroach.com >> >> >> >> *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM >> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> *Subject:* OT: Postini Quarantine >> >> >> >> I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering >> if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: >> >> >> >> >> >> Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of >> thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re >> very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. >> >> >> >> I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles >> with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say >> something about them making some changes on their end, and something else >> about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to >> think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t >> making it into my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, >> and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary >> generally has 150 or so messages in it). >> >> >> >> So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar >> results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> John Hornbuckle >> >> MIS Department >> >> Taylor County School District >> >> 318 North Clark Street >> >> Perry, FL 32347 >> >> >> >> www.taylor.k12.fl.us >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications >> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the >> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to >> public disclosure. >> >> >> >> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications >> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the >> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to >> public disclosure. >> >> > <>
RE: Postini Quarantine
We have it configured to blackhole obvious spam-the problem is that it's not too bright at figuring out what's obvious spam. But cranking up the sensitivity may help. From: Roger Wright [mailto:rhw...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:16 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine You'll probably want to Blackhole obvious spam, and this will prevent 70% or more from even hitting the remaining filters. Roger Wright ___ Sent from Tampa, FL, United States On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM, John Hornbuckle mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> wrote: We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us> From: Don Guyer [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we experienced with Postini. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine And what are you using now? On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. Don Guyer Systems Engineer - Information Services Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Direct: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: [cid:image001.png@01CA5264.0E618600] Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: Postini Quarantine
I subscribe to lists like these with my gmail and that is it. No, I do not trust them... On 10/21/09, John Hornbuckle wrote: > You must, too-at least to some degree, since you're writing from a Gmail > address. > > :) > > > > From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:57 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > "And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." > > U, what? Really? Wow... > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle > mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> > wrote: > We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than > Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. > > The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup > (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. > > Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. > > I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road > between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. > I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a > difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... > > > > John Hornbuckle > MIS Department > Taylor County School District > 318 North Clark Street > Perry, FL 32347 > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> > > > > From: Don Guyer > [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we > experienced with Postini. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: Jonathan Link > [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > And what are you using now? > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer > mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: John Hornbuckle > [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > [cid:image001.png@01CA5260.FF836660] > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into > my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> > > > > > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > -- Sent from my mobile device
RE: Postini Quarantine
Trust Google?.. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, a data marketing company.. Trust? Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, That's a good one. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:55 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine I subscribe to lists like these with my gmail and that is it. No, I do not trust them... On 10/21/09, John Hornbuckle wrote: > You must, too-at least to some degree, since you're writing from a Gmail > address. > > :) > > > > From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:57 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > "And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." > > U, what? Really? Wow... > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle > mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> > wrote: > We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than > Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. > > The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup > (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. > > Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. > > I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road > between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. > I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a > difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... > > > > John Hornbuckle > MIS Department > Taylor County School District > 318 North Clark Street > Perry, FL 32347 > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> > > > > From: Don Guyer > [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we > experienced with Postini. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: Jonathan Link > [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > And what are you using now? > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer > mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: John Hornbuckle > [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.f l.us>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > [cid:image001.png@01CA5260.FF836660] > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into > my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> >
Re: Postini Quarantine
Oh, I trust them. I trust them to take all the care that the money I pay them requires. Just like Microsoft. Kurt On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 16:32, Matt Moore wrote: > Trust Google?.. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, a data marketing > company.. Trust? Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, That's a good one. > > -Original Message- > From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:55 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > I subscribe to lists like these with my gmail and that is it. No, I > do not trust them... > > On 10/21/09, John Hornbuckle wrote: >> You must, too-at least to some degree, since you're writing from a Gmail >> address. >> >> :) >> >> >> >> From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:57 PM >> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine >> >> "And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." >> >> U, what? Really? Wow... >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle >> > mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> >> wrote: >> We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than >> Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. >> >> The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup >> (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. >> >> Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. >> >> I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road >> between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. >> I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a >> difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... >> >> >> >> John Hornbuckle >> MIS Department >> Taylor County School District >> 318 North Clark Street >> Perry, FL 32347 >> >> www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> >> >> >> >> From: Don Guyer >> [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM >> >> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine >> >> MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like > we >> experienced with Postini. >> >> Don Guyer >> Systems Engineer - Information Services >> Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group >> 431 W. Lancaster Avenue >> Devon, PA 19333 >> Direct: (610) 993-3299 >> Fax: (610) 650-5306 >> don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> >> >> From: Jonathan Link >> [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM >> >> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine >> >> And what are you using now? >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer >> mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: >> We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. >> >> Don Guyer >> Systems Engineer - Information Services >> Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group >> 431 W. Lancaster Avenue >> Devon, PA 19333 >> Direct: (610) 993-3299 >> Fax: (610) 650-5306 >> don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> >> >> From: John Hornbuckle >> > [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.f > l.us>] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM >> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues >> Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine >> >> >> I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering > if >> I was the only one. Here's a typical example: >> >> >> >> [cid:image001.png@01CA5260.FF836660] >> >> >> >> Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of >> thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, > they're >> very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. >> >> >> >> I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles > with >> them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something >> about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me >> submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think > this >> is
Re: Postini Quarantine
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer wrote: > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced > with Postini. We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine everything. Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-) -- Ben
Re: Postini Quarantine
Ninja. It just works. On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer > wrote: > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and > > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced > > with Postini. > > We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite > problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up > in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the > mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine > everything. > > Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-) > > -- Ben > > -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke Sent from Newark, TX, United States
RE: Postini Quarantine
I realize that cynicism is en vogue, but I would argue that Google's track record isn't atrocious. When I say I trust them, I mean that they're a large, well-capitalized company with a pretty good reputation for innovation and technical stability. When we were looking for a company to route all of our e-mail through, we wanted to go with a company like that rather than a smaller organization. John -Original Message- From: Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 7:32 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine Trust Google?.. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, a data marketing company.. Trust? Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, That's a good one. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 12:55 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine I subscribe to lists like these with my gmail and that is it. No, I do not trust them... On 10/21/09, John Hornbuckle wrote: > You must, too-at least to some degree, since you're writing from a Gmail > address. > > :) > > > > From: Don Ely [mailto:don@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:57 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > "And, frankly, we trusted the Google name." > > U, what? Really? Wow... > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Hornbuckle > mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> > wrote: > We had looked at them, but they were considerably more expensive than > Postini. And, frankly, we trusted the Google name. > > The archiving feature works great, and the service has never had a hiccup > (in terms of mail flow) since we started using it. No complaints there. > > Just too much mail going into quarantine that should be blocked outright. > > I've got the filter sensitivity set to 3, which is the middle of the road > between the lenient and aggressive ends. I would've thought that was okay. > I've just bumped it up to 4 for my own account to see if that makes a > difference. I don't want to get too aggressive, though... > > > > John Hornbuckle > MIS Department > Taylor County School District > 318 North Clark Street > Perry, FL 32347 > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us/> > > > > From: Don Guyer > [mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:43 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Postini Quarantine > > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and bad moments, but nothing like we > experienced with Postini. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: Jonathan Link > [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:42 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine > > And what are you using now? > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Don Guyer > mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com>> wrote: > We dumped Postini because of reasons such as this. > > Don Guyer > Systems Engineer - Information Services > Prudential, Fox & Roach/Trident Group > 431 W. Lancaster Avenue > Devon, PA 19333 > Direct: (610) 993-3299 > Fax: (610) 650-5306 > don.gu...@prufoxroach.com<mailto:don.gu...@prufoxroach.com> > > From: John Hornbuckle > [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.f l.us>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:33 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: OT: Postini Quarantine > > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > [cid:image001.png@01CA5260.FF836660] > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into > my users' inb
Re: Postini Quarantine
Is someone hosting it, though? On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Sherry Abercrombie wrote: > Ninja. It just works. > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer >> wrote: >> > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and >> > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced >> > with Postini. >> >> We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite >> problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up >> in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the >> mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine >> everything. >> >> Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-) >> >> -- Ben >> >> > > > -- > Sherry Abercrombie > > "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." > Arthur C. Clarke > Sent from Newark, TX, United States
Re: Postini Quarantine
No, it's installed on my Exchange server. It quarantines what I tell it to quarantine, deletes what I tell it to delete, and I have ~ 2% (guesstimate) of spam actually getting to mailboxes. Plus, it has the user level spam control in the mailboxes. I installed it several months ago, since then I've done maybe an hours worth of time in tweaking, making changes in it. Administrative overhead is virtually non-existent. On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jonathan Link wrote: > Is someone hosting it, though? > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Sherry Abercrombie > wrote: > >> Ninja. It just works. >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer >>> wrote: >>> > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and >>> > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced >>> > with Postini. >>> >>> We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite >>> problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up >>> in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the >>> mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine >>> everything. >>> >>> Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-) >>> >>> -- Ben >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sherry Abercrombie >> >> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." >> Arthur C. Clarke >> Sent from Newark, TX, United States >> > > -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke Sent from Newark, TX, United States
RE: Postini Quarantine
Got to +1 that also.
It just works.
From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine
No, it's installed on my Exchange server. It quarantines what I tell it
to quarantine, deletes what I tell it to delete, and I have ~ 2%
(guesstimate) of spam actually getting to mailboxes. Plus, it has the
user level spam control in the mailboxes. I installed it several months
ago, since then I've done maybe an hours worth of time in tweaking,
making changes in it. Administrative overhead is virtually
non-existent.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jonathan Link
wrote:
Is someone hosting it, though?
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Sherry Abercrombie
wrote:
Ninja. It just works.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer
wrote:
> MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and
> bad moments, but nothing like we experienced
> with Postini.
We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the
opposite
problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost
nothing shows up
in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what
happened to the
mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set
to quarantine
everything.
Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-)
-- Ben
--
Sherry Abercrombie
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic."
Arthur C. Clarke
Sent from Newark, TX, United States
--
Sherry Abercrombie
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke
Sent from Newark, TX, United States
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read,
distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately via e-mail
if you have received this e-mail by mistake; then, delete this e-mail from your
system.
Re: Postini Quarantine
Does it (Ninja VIPRE) install on HT/CAS servers or MBX servers ? Can it run
on a virtualized instance of an HT/CAS server ? What's the performance hit
on those servers (CPU/MEM/DISK) ? If any ?
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Eldridge, Dave wrote:
> Got to +1 that also.
>
> It just works.
>
>
>
> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:08 AM
> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Postini Quarantine
>
>
>
> No, it's installed on my Exchange server. It quarantines what I tell it to
> quarantine, deletes what I tell it to delete, and I have ~ 2% (guesstimate)
> of spam actually getting to mailboxes. Plus, it has the user level spam
> control in the mailboxes. I installed it several months ago, since then
> I've done maybe an hours worth of time in tweaking, making changes in it.
> Administrative overhead is virtually non-existent.
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jonathan Link
> wrote:
>
> Is someone hosting it, though?
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Sherry Abercrombie
> wrote:
>
> Ninja. It just works.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer
> wrote:
> > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and
> > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced
> > with Postini.
>
> We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite
> problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up
> in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the
> mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine
> everything.
>
> Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-)
>
> -- Ben
>
>
>
> --
> Sherry Abercrombie
>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> Arthur C. Clarke
> Sent from Newark, TX, United States
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sherry Abercrombie
>
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
> Arthur C. Clarke
> Sent from Newark, TX, United States
>
> This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does not
> represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.
>
> This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above, may
> be confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as such in
> accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this communication, or
> any of its contents, is prohibited. If you have received this communication
> in error, please return to sender and delete the message from your computer
> system.{token}
>
Re: Postini Quarantine
I'm still on E2K3, so I can't answer the first question, but I can say that
I saw no noticeable performance hit on my E2K3 box. I'm sure that it could
run on a virtualized instance of the server though, I'm running Vipre
Anti-virus on a virtual server with no issues at all.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Harry Singh wrote:
> Does it (Ninja VIPRE) install on HT/CAS servers or MBX servers ? Can it run
> on a virtualized instance of an HT/CAS server ? What's the performance hit
> on those servers (CPU/MEM/DISK) ? If any ?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Eldridge, Dave wrote:
>
>> Got to +1 that also.
>>
>> It just works.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:08 AM
>> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: Postini Quarantine
>>
>>
>>
>> No, it's installed on my Exchange server. It quarantines what I tell it
>> to quarantine, deletes what I tell it to delete, and I have ~ 2%
>> (guesstimate) of spam actually getting to mailboxes. Plus, it has the user
>> level spam control in the mailboxes. I installed it several months ago,
>> since then I've done maybe an hours worth of time in tweaking, making
>> changes in it. Administrative overhead is virtually non-existent.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Jonathan Link
>> wrote:
>>
>> Is someone hosting it, though?
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Sherry Abercrombie
>> wrote:
>>
>> Ninja. It just works.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Ben Scott wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer
>> wrote:
>> > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and
>> > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced
>> > with Postini.
>>
>> We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite
>> problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up
>> in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the
>> mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine
>> everything.
>>
>> Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-)
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sherry Abercrombie
>>
>> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
>> Arthur C. Clarke
>> Sent from Newark, TX, United States
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sherry Abercrombie
>>
>> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
>> Arthur C. Clarke
>> Sent from Newark, TX, United States
>>
>> This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does not
>> represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.
>>
>> This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above, may
>> be confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as such in
>> accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this communication, or
>> any of its contents, is prohibited. If you have received this communication
>> in error, please return to sender and delete the message from your computer
>> system.{token}
>>
>
>
--
Sherry Abercrombie
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke
Sent from Newark, TX, United States
RE: Postini Quarantine
We use Katharion. Worked really well until we just got the news they were bought out by GFI - not sure what to think now. Jay -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini Quarantine On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Don Guyer wrote: > MX Logic. Now, they do have their good and > bad moments, but nothing like we experienced > with Postini. We're actually unhappy with MX Logic because of the opposite problem: *Everything* gets silently discarded, almost nothing shows up in quarantine, and there's no way to find out what happened to the mail people aren't getting. This despite having it set to quarantine everything. Isn't there a happy medium here somewhere?!? :-) -- Ben
RE: Contact @ Postini
Someone from Google just cold-called & emailed me the other day. Here's what his email said: ___ I would like to step forward and extend any help that you may need in understanding our services. I can provide information on: * Email Filtering & Security * Email Archiving & E-discovery * Web Filtering & Security * Google Apps Please let me know if you have any questions that I can help with. Regards, Hank Uhlaender huhla...@google.com 512-343-5211 Regional Marketing Representative Google Message Security & Compliance 9606 N. Mopac Expw., STE 400 Austin, TX 78759 USA ___ We're using Microsoft's Forefront Online Security for Exchange (Microsoft's competitor to PostINI), so I didn't really have much to talk with him about. :) HTH Joe P -Original Message- From: gro...@beachcomp.com [mailto:gro...@beachcomp.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 11:09 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Contact @ Postini Hi folks, Anyone have any contacts @ Google/Postini that I can actually contact via phone? All they have on the web is a form which no one seems to ever reply to. Thanks!
Re: RE: Postini
Postini servers passes the 220 request back to configured company internal servers. They take your exchange server answers and pass it same way to asking server. Everything else you should be able do it from Postini CP and your mail servers internally Best Ocd On May 11, 2011 1:55 PM, "Matt Moore" wrote: > > Typically the server is set up to only talk to Postini in and out. Dns all pointed to postini. Very poor to no cust service. I used to have the setup doc around but I can’t seem to find it. Bet you could download it from them…. > > M > > > > From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 8:39 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Postini > > > > I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer consolidation where Postini is involved – > > > > My question – Can I do per user email routing with Postini? > > Example > > b...@bob.com is routed to mail.bob.com > > f...@bob.com is routed to mail.fredco.com > > sa...@bob.com is routed to coolserver.bob.com > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com > with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com > with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:33 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > I'm using the private DNS method, where you configure Exchange to use > a specific DNS server to resolve addresses for messages bound for > the outside world. Ewww. They can't let you just configure an SMTP "smart host" to receive all your outbound mail? That would seem to be a lot less disgusting. > For kicks, I dropped to a command prompt on my server and ran nslookup, > pointing it to Postini's DNS server. I was able to connect, but not resolve > any > host names. Every time I tried, I got a "query refused" message. Sounds like this is more of a DNS issue than an Exchange issue. But anyway, their nameservers are prolly configured to only accept queries from known IP addresses (i.e., their customers). The queries issued from your Exchange box are apparently not coming from an IP address they expect. Looks for NAT, firewall, proxy, etc., devices between your Exchange box and the rest of the world. Chances are your DNS queries aren't coming from where you think they are. -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini
I use postini inbound and outbound, and I'm running exchange 2003. I just setup a smarthost on exchange and didn't touch my dns. Jon On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Ben Scott wrote: > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:33 AM, John > Hornbuckle wrote: >> I'm using the private DNS method, where you configure Exchange to use >> a specific DNS server to resolve addresses for messages bound for >> the outside world. > > Ewww. They can't let you just configure an SMTP "smart host" to > receive all your outbound mail? That would seem to be a lot less > disgusting. > >> For kicks, I dropped to a command prompt on my server and ran nslookup, >> pointing it to Postini's DNS server. I was able to connect, but not resolve >> any >> host names. Every time I tried, I got a "query refused" message. > > Sounds like this is more of a DNS issue than an Exchange issue. But > anyway, their nameservers are prolly configured to only accept queries > from known IP addresses (i.e., their customers). The queries issued > from your Exchange box are apparently not coming from an IP address > they expect. Looks for NAT, firewall, proxy, etc., devices between > your Exchange box and the rest of the world. Chances are your DNS > queries aren't coming from where you think they are. > > -- Ben > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ > ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini
Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then give you several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. So, that's why I went that route. Good point on the NAT suggestion... I had forgotten that this server has two NICs. One has a public IP address, and that's the one that outbound mail is routed through (I can confirm this by looking at message headers). The other NIC has a NAT address. When I go to the web, traffic is routed through that one (I can confirm this by going to whatismyip.com). So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution when looking to a private DNS server... -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 9:44 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:33 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > I'm using the private DNS method, where you configure Exchange to use > a specific DNS server to resolve addresses for messages bound for > the outside world. Ewww. They can't let you just configure an SMTP "smart host" to receive all your outbound mail? That would seem to be a lot less disgusting. > For kicks, I dropped to a command prompt on my server and ran nslookup, > pointing it to Postini's DNS server. I was able to connect, but not resolve > any > host names. Every time I tried, I got a "query refused" message. Sounds like this is more of a DNS issue than an Exchange issue. But anyway, their nameservers are prolly configured to only accept queries from known IP addresses (i.e., their customers). The queries issued from your Exchange box are apparently not coming from an IP address they expect. Looks for NAT, firewall, proxy, etc., devices between your Exchange box and the rest of the world. Chances are your DNS queries aren't coming from where you think they are. -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then give > you > several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. I can't think of any reason why that would be a good thing (other than "Postini assumes all mail server admins are idiots and can't figure out how to use a smarthost"), and I can think of a few reasons why it's not a good idea: * Configuration headaches like the one you're in the middle of. * Should your mail server get configured with the "wrong" DNS server, or otherwise "see" the "real" DNS namespace, mail will go the wrong way. * It means your mail server is now seeing different DNS answers than the rest of universe. Who knows what that might complicate down the road? Diagnostics. * You're dependent on Postini's DNS servers. If they glitch, it's your problem. Maybe they know something I don't. > So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, > but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution > when looking to a private DNS server... I would guess it's going to use whatever the routing tables say to use, and yours say to prefer the inside network. You could reconfigure your mail server's routing tables, with a single default route via whatever is next-hop from your "public" NIC. If you have multiple IP networks on the "private" side, you'll need specific static routes for those, via next-hop gateways on the "private" NIC. (This would now be one more reason not to use Postini's DNS servers -- your network connectivity is more complicated/fragile.) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini
Okay, we got it fixed. The DNS traffic was, indeed, going out the NAT'd address, and that address wasn't allowed to resolve hosts on Postini's server. Once I fixed that, I was able to point Exchange at Postini and mail was flowing. If this message makes it to the list, it must be working. :-) As to private DNS vs. smart host, here's what the Postini docs say: "Private Outbound DNS Service provides a simple, reliable way to route outbound mail to the message security service. It is an alternative to using a smarthost to route outbound mail. Using a smarthost can cause queued messages and mail delays for many mail servers, especially Microsoft Exchange mail servers. Private Outbound DNS Service is designed to ease setup and prevent queueing delays, and is recommended for any administrator using a supported mail server." I'm not an expert on this kind of thing, so I went with their judgment on this. Using a smarthost *sounded* easier to me, but I figured I must've been missing something. -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then give > you > several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. I can't think of any reason why that would be a good thing (other than "Postini assumes all mail server admins are idiots and can't figure out how to use a smarthost"), and I can think of a few reasons why it's not a good idea: * Configuration headaches like the one you're in the middle of. * Should your mail server get configured with the "wrong" DNS server, or otherwise "see" the "real" DNS namespace, mail will go the wrong way. * It means your mail server is now seeing different DNS answers than the rest of universe. Who knows what that might complicate down the road? Diagnostics. * You're dependent on Postini's DNS servers. If they glitch, it's your problem. Maybe they know something I don't. > So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, > but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution > when looking to a private DNS server... I would guess it's going to use whatever the routing tables say to use, and yours say to prefer the inside network. You could reconfigure your mail server's routing tables, with a single default route via whatever is next-hop from your "public" NIC. If you have multiple IP networks on the "private" side, you'll need specific static routes for those, via next-hop gateways on the "private" NIC. (This would now be one more reason not to use Postini's DNS servers -- your network connectivity is more complicated/fragile.) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini
I think you've just seen how much mangling your DNS setup "eased your setup". I believe your first instincts were good. -Original Message- From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 9:11 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini Okay, we got it fixed. The DNS traffic was, indeed, going out the NAT'd address, and that address wasn't allowed to resolve hosts on Postini's server. Once I fixed that, I was able to point Exchange at Postini and mail was flowing. If this message makes it to the list, it must be working. :-) As to private DNS vs. smart host, here's what the Postini docs say: "Private Outbound DNS Service provides a simple, reliable way to route outbound mail to the message security service. It is an alternative to using a smarthost to route outbound mail. Using a smarthost can cause queued messages and mail delays for many mail servers, especially Microsoft Exchange mail servers. Private Outbound DNS Service is designed to ease setup and prevent queueing delays, and is recommended for any administrator using a supported mail server." I'm not an expert on this kind of thing, so I went with their judgment on this. Using a smarthost *sounded* easier to me, but I figured I must've been missing something. -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then give you > several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. I can't think of any reason why that would be a good thing (other than "Postini assumes all mail server admins are idiots and can't figure out how to use a smarthost"), and I can think of a few reasons why it's not a good idea: * Configuration headaches like the one you're in the middle of. * Should your mail server get configured with the "wrong" DNS server, or otherwise "see" the "real" DNS namespace, mail will go the wrong way. * It means your mail server is now seeing different DNS answers than the rest of universe. Who knows what that might complicate down the road? Diagnostics. * You're dependent on Postini's DNS servers. If they glitch, it's your problem. Maybe they know something I don't. > So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, > but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution > when looking to a private DNS server... I would guess it's going to use whatever the routing tables say to use, and yours say to prefer the inside network. You could reconfigure your mail server's routing tables, with a single default route via whatever is next-hop from your "public" NIC. If you have multiple IP networks on the "private" side, you'll need specific static routes for those, via next-hop gateways on the "private" NIC. (This would now be one more reason not to use Postini's DNS servers -- your network connectivity is more complicated/fragile.) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini
I've used a smarthost for my outbound email from Exchange for years, never ever have I had issues with it being queued or delayed.and really, how hard is it to setup a smarthost in Exchange??? (That was a sarcastic question, no need to respond) On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Don Andrews wrote: > I think you've just seen how much mangling your DNS setup "eased your > setup". > > I believe your first instincts were good. > > -Original Message- > From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] > Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 9:11 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini > > Okay, we got it fixed. The DNS traffic was, indeed, going out the NAT'd > address, and that address wasn't allowed to resolve hosts on Postini's > server. Once I fixed that, I was able to point Exchange at Postini and > mail was flowing. If this message makes it to the list, it must be > working. :-) > > As to private DNS vs. smart host, here's what the Postini docs say: > > "Private Outbound DNS Service provides a simple, reliable way to route > outbound mail to the message security service. It is an alternative to > using a smarthost to route outbound mail. Using a smarthost can cause > queued messages and mail delays for many mail servers, especially > Microsoft Exchange mail servers. > > Private Outbound DNS Service is designed to ease setup and prevent > queueing delays, and is recommended for any administrator using a > supported mail server." > > I'm not an expert on this kind of thing, so I went with their judgment > on this. Using a smarthost *sounded* easier to me, but I figured I > must've been missing something. > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:41 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, John > Hornbuckle wrote: > > Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then > give you > > several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. > > I can't think of any reason why that would be a good thing (other > than "Postini assumes all mail server admins are idiots and can't > figure out how to use a smarthost"), and I can think of a few reasons > why it's not a good idea: > > * Configuration headaches like the one you're in the middle of. > * Should your mail server get configured with the "wrong" DNS server, > or otherwise "see" the "real" DNS namespace, mail will go the wrong > way. > * It means your mail server is now seeing different DNS answers than > the rest of universe. Who knows what that might complicate down the > road? Diagnostics. > * You're dependent on Postini's DNS servers. If they glitch, it's your > problem. > > Maybe they know something I don't. > > > So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, > > but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution > > when looking to a private DNS server... > > I would guess it's going to use whatever the routing tables say to > use, and yours say to prefer the inside network. > > You could reconfigure your mail server's routing tables, with a > single default route via whatever is next-hop from your "public" NIC. > If you have multiple IP networks on the "private" side, you'll need > specific static routes for those, via next-hop gateways on the > "private" NIC. (This would now be one more reason not to use > Postini's DNS servers -- your network connectivity is more > complicated/fragile.) > > -- Ben > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ > ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ > ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ > > > > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ > ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ > > -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke Sent from Haslet, TX, United States ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini
That sounds like a veiled admission their outbound mail servers occasionally can't handle the load... -sc -Original Message- From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 & Postini Okay, we got it fixed. The DNS traffic was, indeed, going out the NAT'd address, and that address wasn't allowed to resolve hosts on Postini's server. Once I fixed that, I was able to point Exchange at Postini and mail was flowing. If this message makes it to the list, it must be working. :-) As to private DNS vs. smart host, here's what the Postini docs say: "Private Outbound DNS Service provides a simple, reliable way to route outbound mail to the message security service. It is an alternative to using a smarthost to route outbound mail. Using a smarthost can cause queued messages and mail delays for many mail servers, especially Microsoft Exchange mail servers. Private Outbound DNS Service is designed to ease setup and prevent queueing delays, and is recommended for any administrator using a supported mail server." I'm not an expert on this kind of thing, so I went with their judgment on this. Using a smarthost *sounded* easier to me, but I figured I must've been missing something. -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > Well, they give you both options--smart host and private DNS--and then give you > several reasons why they believe private DNS is better. I can't think of any reason why that would be a good thing (other than "Postini assumes all mail server admins are idiots and can't figure out how to use a smarthost"), and I can think of a few reasons why it's not a good idea: * Configuration headaches like the one you're in the middle of. * Should your mail server get configured with the "wrong" DNS server, or otherwise "see" the "real" DNS namespace, mail will go the wrong way. * It means your mail server is now seeing different DNS answers than the rest of universe. Who knows what that might complicate down the road? Diagnostics. * You're dependent on Postini's DNS servers. If they glitch, it's your problem. Maybe they know something I don't. > So now I'm wondering... I know which NIC/IP is used for sending mail, > but I can't say for sure which NIC/IP Exchange uses for DNS resolution > when looking to a private DNS server... I would guess it's going to use whatever the routing tables say to use, and yours say to prefer the inside network. You could reconfigure your mail server's routing tables, with a single default route via whatever is next-hop from your "public" NIC. If you have multiple IP networks on the "private" side, you'll need specific static routes for those, via next-hop gateways on the "private" NIC. (This would now be one more reason not to use Postini's DNS servers -- your network connectivity is more complicated/fragile.) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange 2007 & Postini
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:11 PM, John Hornbuckle wrote: > If this message makes it to the list, it must be working. :-) What if I didn't see the message? ;-) >> "Using a smarthost can cause queued messages and mail delays for many >> mail servers, especially Microsoft Exchange mail servers." I'm with Mr. Caesare: I read that as Postini saying: "Our mail servers are flaky and we'd like to blame yours." I'm also with with Mr. Andrews; I'm not seeing the "easy" here. I've been using smarthosts with Exchange since 5.5 without trouble. Indeed, when I was consulting, we often put an Exchange box behind a *nix gateway and sent *all* mail through that gateway via smarthost. That's still how I've got our Exchange server configured at %JOB%. (This was needed more back with Exchange 2000, which was moronic about things like rejecting invalid recipients. Now it's more a convenience, plus an added layer of defense between Exchange and the outside world.) -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: OT: Postini Quarantine
I'm so glad I don't use Postini anymore... On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:32 AM, John Hornbuckle < john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering > if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
Re: OT: Postini Quarantine
I setup Postini in the cloud for my previous employer and we had great results with the filters set at the highest level. Roger Wright ___ On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM, John Hornbuckle < john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering > if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
RE: OT: Postini Quarantine
You didn't have too many false positives that way? From: Roger Wright [mailto:rhw...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:48 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: OT: Postini Quarantine I setup Postini in the cloud for my previous employer and we had great results with the filters set at the highest level. Roger Wright ___ On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM, John Hornbuckle mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> wrote: I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if I was the only one. Here's a typical example: [cid:image001.png@01CA525E.69224EE0] Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they're very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. I've been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn't making it into my users' inboxes-but it's making it into their quarantine, and it takes time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has 150 or so messages in it). So I'm wondering of those of you who use Postini... Do you see similar results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public disclosure. <>
Re: OT: Postini Quarantine
We worked with the default settings for a week or two, then I set everyone for Aggressive (5). FPs were rare with Postini, but there were a few over the 6 months that we used the system. Users quickly learned to check their quarantine each morning. Roger Wright ___ Sent from Tampa, FL, United States On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:54 PM, John Hornbuckle < john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > You didn’t have too many false positives that way? > > > > > > > > *From:* Roger Wright [mailto:rhw...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:48 PM > *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: OT: Postini Quarantine > > > > I setup Postini in the cloud for my previous employer and we had great > results with the filters set at the highest level. > > > > > > Roger Wright > ___ > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM, John Hornbuckle < > john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us> wrote: > > I'm having rotten luck with Postini's junk mail filtering, and wondering if > I was the only one. Here's a typical example: > > > > > > Note that only 2 messages were blocked outright as spam, while a couple of > thousand were quarantined. When I look at the quarantined messages, they’re > very blatant spam--various colon cleansers and enlargers and what not. > > > > I’ve been working with Postini support, but am going around in circles with > them. They say everything is configured correctly, and they say something > about them making some changes on their end, and something else about me > submitting spam headers to them, blah bah. Nobody there seems to think this > is quite as problematic as I do. And granted, the junk isn’t making it into > my users’ inboxes—but it’s making it into their quarantine, and it takes > time to look over that (my personal daily quarantine summary generally has > 150 or so messages in it). > > > > So I’m wondering of those of you who use Postini… Do you see similar > results? Or do you have better luck having spam blocked outright? > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > 318 North Clark Street > > Perry, FL 32347 > > > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > > > NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications > to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the > public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to > public disclosure. > > <>
Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I turn to you fine people. We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have external contacts in them When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service are not getting our messages. Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender information. These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003. >From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a "from" address, which can vary. However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one off basis with zero issues. Anyone have any thoughts? thanks Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini? From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I turn to you fine people. We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have external contacts in them When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service are not getting our messages. Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender information. These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003. >From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a "from" >address, which can vary. However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one off basis with zero issues. Anyone have any thoughts? thanks Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com> Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1 ** Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. **
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never received the message Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Are you getting an NDR from Postini? From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I turn to you fine people. We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have external contacts in them When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service are not getting our messages. Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender information. These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003. >From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a "from" address, which can vary. However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one off basis with zero issues. Anyone have any thoughts? thanks Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1 ** Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. **
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them. Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the headers against one that went through. From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never received the message Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com> Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Are you getting an NDR from Postini? From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I turn to you fine people. We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have external contacts in them When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service are not getting our messages. Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender information. These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003. >From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a "from" >address, which can vary. However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one off basis with zero issues. Anyone have any thoughts? thanks Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com> Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1 ** Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. ** ** Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. **
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a
tech to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522
Header:1264 Size:6883 virus:4(0)
Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the
headers against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an
issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never
received the message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their
support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I
turn to you fine people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have
external contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service
are not getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a
"from" address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting
removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one
off basis with zero issues.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thanks
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and
may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you
are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply
e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy
it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you for your cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you
that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
(1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable
state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending
to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03
pdc1
**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and
confidential and
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
by
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
**
**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and
confidential and
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to
the intended rec
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
You could try asking for the log entry and see if they send you the headers.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:13 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a tech
to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522 Header:1264
Size:6883 virus:4(0) Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com>
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the headers
against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an issue
until one of the recipients called our user because they never received the
message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com>
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their support
staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I turn to you fine
people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have external
contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service are not
getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a "from"
>address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting removed
when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one off basis with
zero issues.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thanks
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com<mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com>
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may
well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice
of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete
this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your
cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that,
unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in
this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to
be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under
the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2)
promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters
addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03
pdc1
**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
r
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
LOL, that may be worth a try
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
You could try asking for the log entry and see if they send you the
headers.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:13 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a
tech to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522
Header:1264 Size:6883 virus:4(0)
Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the
headers against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an
issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never
received the message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their
support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I
turn to you fine people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have
external contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service
are not getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a
"from" address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting
removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one
off basis with zero issues.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thanks
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and
may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you
are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply
e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy
it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you for your cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you
that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of
(1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable
state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending
to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03
pdc1
**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and
confidential and
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribut
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Oddly enough, we seem to have figured this out. It seems that when some
of our DL's were created, they were checked to "Not send delivery
reports"
That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just leaving
the from field populated.
Postini must have recently changed something to start causing us issues
as these have been like this for years, but at least now we can fix it
on our side
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:21 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
LOL, that may be worth a try
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
You could try asking for the log entry and see if they send you the
headers.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:13 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a
tech to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522
Header:1264 Size:6883 virus:4(0)
Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the
headers against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an
issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never
received the message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their
support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I
turn to you fine people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have
external contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service
are not getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a
"from" address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting
removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one
off basis with zero issues.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thanks
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and
may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you
are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply
e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy
it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you for your cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you
that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) i
Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just > leaving the from field populated. Normally, a null reverse-path is used only for DSNs, but spammers sometimes set a null reverse-path on their spam. Postini's system was likely seeing that the message looked *nothing* like a DSN, and so discarded it. A null reverse-path looks like this in the SMTP dialog: MAIL FROM:<> DSNs don't have a reverse-path because otherwise if a message had both a bad forward-path and a bad reverse-path, the endpoint MTAs would keep bouncing DSNs back and forth forever. Back in the day, a null reverse-path was sometimes used for a message that should never get responded to, such as a vacation notice or a broadcast email. In these days of so much legitimate bulk email, it's considered poor form to do that. Every message should have a way to get back to some kind of sender person or process. For example, a bulk mail system should automatically recognize failure DSNs and remove repeatedly failing addresses from the mailing list. -- Ben
Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Maybe some spammers had signed up with Postini in an effort to undermine Postini's engine? I've noted a marked increase in spam getting through to my gmail inbox in the last few weeks. On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > Yeah, that makes sense, I'm just not sure why Postini just started acting > up with these messages, but who really knows what goes one there > > Ronald Wulff Jr > 412.288.3601 > rwu...@reedsmith.com > Reed Smith LLP > 20 Stanwix St > Suite 1200 > Pittsburgh, PA 15222 > > > -Original Message- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 3:13 PM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. > wrote: > > That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just > > leaving the from field populated. > > Normally, a null reverse-path is used only for DSNs, but spammers > sometimes set a null reverse-path on their spam. Postini's system was > likely seeing that the message looked *nothing* like a DSN, and so > discarded it. > > A null reverse-path looks like this in the SMTP dialog: > >MAIL FROM:<> > > DSNs don't have a reverse-path because otherwise if a message had > both a bad forward-path and a bad reverse-path, the endpoint MTAs > would keep bouncing DSNs back and forth forever. > > Back in the day, a null reverse-path was sometimes used for a > message that should never get responded to, such as a vacation notice > or a broadcast email. In these days of so much legitimate bulk email, > it's considered poor form to do that. Every message should have a way > to get back to some kind of sender person or process. For example, a > bulk mail system should automatically recognize failure DSNs and > remove repeatedly failing addresses from the mailing list. > > -- Ben > > * * * > > This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may > well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on > notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then > delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for > any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for > your cooperation. > * * * > To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you > that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice > contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended > or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding > penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local > provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any > tax-related matters addressed herein. > Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 > pdc1 > > >
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Yeah, that makes sense, I'm just not sure why Postini just started acting up with these messages, but who really knows what goes one there Ronald Wulff Jr 412.288.3601 rwu...@reedsmith.com Reed Smith LLP 20 Stanwix St Suite 1200 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 3:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just > leaving the from field populated. Normally, a null reverse-path is used only for DSNs, but spammers sometimes set a null reverse-path on their spam. Postini's system was likely seeing that the message looked *nothing* like a DSN, and so discarded it. A null reverse-path looks like this in the SMTP dialog: MAIL FROM:<> DSNs don't have a reverse-path because otherwise if a message had both a bad forward-path and a bad reverse-path, the endpoint MTAs would keep bouncing DSNs back and forth forever. Back in the day, a null reverse-path was sometimes used for a message that should never get responded to, such as a vacation notice or a broadcast email. In these days of so much legitimate bulk email, it's considered poor form to do that. Every message should have a way to get back to some kind of sender person or process. For example, a bulk mail system should automatically recognize failure DSNs and remove repeatedly failing addresses from the mailing list. -- Ben * * * This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation. * * * To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Disclaimer Version RS.US.1.01.03 pdc1
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Hmm, does that mean that postini won't accept server generated
rejections (i.e. with null return path)?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 11:44 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Oddly enough, we seem to have figured this out. It seems that when some
of our DL's were created, they were checked to "Not send delivery
reports"
That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just leaving
the from field populated.
Postini must have recently changed something to start causing us issues
as these have been like this for years, but at least now we can fix it
on our side
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:21 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
LOL, that may be worth a try
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
You could try asking for the log entry and see if they send you the
headers.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:13 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a
tech to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522
Header:1264 Size:6883 virus:4(0)
Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the
headers against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an
issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never
received the message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their
support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I
turn to you fine people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have
external contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service
are not getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a
"from" address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting
removed when using these DL's, as we can email the recipients on a one
off basis with zero issues.
Anyone have any thoughts?
thanks
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and
may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you
are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply
e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Pleas
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
The Postini feature is called "Null Sender Disposition" and is a feature
and that can be enabled/disabled at will. It is intended as one of the
ways to combat the NDRs generated by spammers forging your e-mail
addresses. Depending on what class of service the company is using
(through a reseller or directly from Postini) it may not be able to be
managed by them directly. However, they could have just recently turned
it on because of those NDRs.
Description of the feature from Postini: Choose where to send messages
that do not have an SMTP (envelope) sender address. These messages are
usually non-delivery reports (NDRs).
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 1:44 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Oddly enough, we seem to have figured this out. It seems that when some
of our DL's were created, they were checked to "Not send delivery
reports"
That was blanking out the return path on the messages, and just leaving
the from field populated.
Postini must have recently changed something to start causing us issues
as these have been like this for years, but at least now we can fix it
on our side
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:21 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
LOL, that may be worth a try
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:17 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
You could try asking for the log entry and see if they send you the
headers.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:13 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
We tried that too, but they sent us back this. We are now waiting for a
tech to contact us again
>From Postini
exprod8mx271.postini.com:2009/07/07 14:36:25 IP:199.125.201.23
SID:c77dc9170386697d To:daniel...@xx.com u207275662:i18522
To:rick...@xx.com u204931628:i18522 To:joseph...@xx.com
u205218651:i18522 To:greg...@xx.com u200772404:i18522
Header:1264 Size:6883 virus:4(0)
Disp:q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend},q{nullsend}
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Then Postini is accepting the emails, and then dropping them.
Ask them if they can give you one of the dropped emails, and check the
headers against one that went through.
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:08 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Nope, we get nothing back. In fact, we didn't even know there was an
issue until one of the recipients called our user because they never
received the message
Ronald Wulff Jr
412.288.3601
rwu...@reedsmith.com
Reed Smith LLP
20 Stanwix St
Suite 1200
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Are you getting an NDR from Postini?
From: Wulff Jr, Ronald J. [mailto:rwu...@reedsmith.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 9:02 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
Recently we have run into an issue with Postini, and as always, their
support staff seems to be lacking in explaining what is going on, so I
turn to you fine people.
We have some DL's setup in our Exchange/AD organization that have
external contacts in them
When we send to these DL's, and recipients who use Postini as a service
are not getting our messages.
Postini says that the messages are coming across with no Envelope Sender
information.
These messages are being sent via Outlook 2003.
>From my understanding, a message has both an Envelope sender, and a
"from" address, which can vary.
However, I am not certain why one of these addresses would be getting
removed when using these DL's, as we
Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > Yeah, that makes sense, I'm just not sure why Postini just started acting up > with > these messages, but who really knows what goes one there Assuming it's not a recent configuration change done by the receiving system's mail admins (as James Knoch describes), Postini may just have changed their spam heuristics recently, to do the sort of "Does this look like a DSN?" analysis I supposed. Note that SMTP DSNs (Delivery Status Notifications) include delivery failure, delivery delay, and return receipt. "NDR" is an Exchange term that applies equally well to a subset of DSNs. -- Ben
RE: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank
NDR has been around far longer than Exchange. :-) DSN is a new-fangled uppity way to describe NDRs, Delivery Notifications, Read Notifications, and etc. as a class of messages. :-) From: Ben Scott [mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 4:36 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Postini blocking based on ENV sender field being blank On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Wulff Jr, Ronald J. wrote: > Yeah, that makes sense, I'm just not sure why Postini just started acting up > with > these messages, but who really knows what goes one there Assuming it's not a recent configuration change done by the receiving system's mail admins (as James Knoch describes), Postini may just have changed their spam heuristics recently, to do the sort of "Does this look like a DSN?" analysis I supposed. Note that SMTP DSNs (Delivery Status Notifications) include delivery failure, delivery delay, and return receipt. "NDR" is an Exchange term that applies equally well to a subset of DSNs. -- Ben
Auditing info on Google Messaging Security and Compliance Services (Postini)
Concern about them has appeared here recently and I thought I would post this information. I recently have had some communication with a sales rep of the aforementioned product. He claimed in his email that: > Postini has passed all FDIC audits, is Sarbanes-Oxley compliant, and > SAS 70 Type II & WebTrust certified. I'm not sure if this actually means anything or not in reality, but it seemed interesting. Comments? ~JasonG -- ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
