Re: [mailop] New Validity policy for paid FBL (ARF)

[Laura Atkins via mailop]

If it’s simply a forwarding service then the format should not matter. It 
should be just as easy to format a XARF message as an ARF message. I think (and 
have thought for a long time - like since I was ab...@above.net 
 and worked for MAPS and was trying to solve the ’this 
ticketing systems sucks for abuse reports’ problem) that any abuse desk should 
be able to handle abuse reports in any format. I believe manually generated 
reports that can be most valuable if they’re coming from a knowledgeable and 
reputable individual. 

I did a lot of thinking about this whole problem in the weeks between the 
Validity announcement and when I published the blog post. Then promptly went on 
holiday and am just now getting back to my desk so thoughts today are a bit 
vague.

As I understand it (and folks who have done this please correct me if I’m 
wrong): there are a few critical components for FBL reports on the generator 
side once they have the this-is-spam functionality in place. 

1) Creating an infrastructure to generate ARF emails.
2) Creating an infrastructure to maintain a mapping of identifier (IP or d= 
seem to be the two common ones) to authorized FBL recipient
3) Creating an infrastructure to authorize and validate FBL recipients

Validity did 2 and 3 (and maybe 1?). 

An open source solution should securely identify the appropriate recipient for 
a ARF report replacing Validity’s role in this. 

I do see a number of ESPs are adding the CFBL header to their outbound mail. 
The question is: can we get some of the FBL senders to respect it and send 
reports there.

Ideally, we’d figure out a way that the industry wasn’t relying on a single 
company to provide a free service. 

laura 


> On 22 Sep 2023, at 07:39, Maarten Oelering via mailop  
> wrote:
> 
> I would like to believe that the solution offered by Abusix is a drop-in 
> replacement. Adding the CFBL-Address header is not too difficult for most 
> senders. 
> But most sender systems rely on ARF reports, with the rfc822 attachment. Not 
> XARF, with the json attachment. So there’s two standards to push.
> 
> Maarten
> 
>> On 22 Sep 2023, at 00:01, Steve Freegard via mailop  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Mike,
>> 
>> Aside from stating categorically that we're not interested in monetizing the 
>> reports like Validity are doing, the only other thing I can suggest is that 
>> you look at the history of what we've done in the past.   We've provided the 
>> Abuse ContactDB as a free service for well over 10 years (used by many 
>> places including Fail2Ban etc.), we've contributed XARF to the community and 
>> are providing Global Reporting, which is a free Abuse Reporting Service (of 
>> which we'll be using 99% of the code already written to implement this 
>> Feedback Loop functionality).
>> 
>> The whole point about backing the Draft RFC is also to open it up as much as 
>> possible.   The current state means that you either pay Validity or you 
>> don't get anything, period.  They have the current monopoly and zero 
>> competition which is why they can do this in the first place.   
>> 
>> I'd also like to point out that there is absolutely no guarantee that any 
>> mailbox providers will come across to us either; that will take persuasion 
>> from the industry, but we make it as easy as possible with this service, 
>> they're effectively swapping one email address with another.  Why would a 
>> mailbox provider, right now, bother to put the development time into 
>> implementing a draft RFC that (at the time of writing) only two entities are 
>> using? (CleverReach and Onmivary with ActiveCampaign to follow soon), they 
>> would also have the on-going management and approval of new CFBL-Addresses 
>> to deal with as well.
>> 
>> The point is; we can implement this pretty quickly with a few code changes 
>> on our end to something we've already been working on for months and provide 
>> an alternative to Validity and help get the draft RFC more widely 
>> implemented - at which point with much wider adoption, it makes it far more 
>> easy (and therefore likely) for mailbox providers to implement this 
>> themselves if they wish to, or for other entities to offer a similar service 
>> should they choose.
>> 
>> That's surely better than the current status quo and sitting back and doing 
>> nothing, right?
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Steve.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 20:43, Mike Hillyer > > wrote:
>>> I think the first question anyone will ask is "How do we know that Abusix 
>>> won't eventually become Validity 2: the Abusix Remix"? I do like the idea 
>>> of pushing the RFC, but if you're in the middle many of those MBPs will 
>>> likely defer to a new middle-man to handle the implementation, and we're 
>>> back at a single vendor.
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> From: mailop mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org>> 
>>> on behalf of Steve Freegard via mailop >> >
>>> Sent: Thursday, Septembe

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

[Scott Mutter via mailop]

Got a response from icloudad...@apple.com stating they've made changes.
But the issue still persists.

We replied back on that message, but I'm not all that convinced that
whoever is checking the icloudad...@apple.com address actually knows what
they are doing.  Especially since it's taken a lot of arm twisting to get
any response at all.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 7:56 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian 
wrote:

> Ok we will check
>
>
> --srs
> --
> *From:* mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 21, 2023 10:23:15 PM
> *To:* mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> Message sent again - today, 2023-09-21 11:51AM CDT.
>
> Subject of the message is - 209.236.124.55 IP Blacklisted
>
> I sent the message to icloudad...@apple.com and CC'd s...@apple.com
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:46 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you resend your message to postmaster with a recent sample of the
> logs? Bcc me at s...@apple.com so I can follow up with the team.
>
>
>
> *From: *mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Date: *Thursday, 21 September 2023 at 8:00 PM
> *To: *mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject: *Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> How long should I have to wait for a response?
>
>
>
> I haven't heard anything back and icloud is still rejecting the message
> due to local policy.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:07 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I will have the team check and reply to you
>
>
>
> *From: *Scott Mutter 
> *Date: *Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 6:28 PM
> *To: *Suresh Ramasubramanian 
> *Subject: *Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> I wrote icloudad...@apple.com on August 26, 2023.
>
>
>
> Message was from postmas...@thoroughbred.wznoc.com
>
>
>
> Subject of the message was - 209.236.124.55 IP Blacklisted
>
>
>
> Just tried resending a message from this server, same error message:
>
>
>
>  554 5.7.1 [HM08] Message rejected due to local policy. Please visit
> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:08 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> What address did you email icloudadmin from?
>
> I don’t see any current blocks on your IP
>
>
>
> --srs
> --
>
> *From:* Suresh Ramasubramanian 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 19, 2023 10:33:52 AM
> *To:* Scott Mutter ; mailop@mailop.org <
> mailop@mailop.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
>
>
> I’ll have someone look at your email and reply if they haven’t yet
>
>
>
> --srs
> --
>
> *From:* mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 19, 2023 9:11:02 AM
> *To:* mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject:* [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local
> policy
>
>
>
> Anybody from Apple/iCloud able to provide any insight as to why messages
> from 209.236.124.55 are being blocked with - Message rejected due to local
> policy messages?
>
>
>
> I previously sent a message to icloudad...@apple.com but got no response.
>
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] Big Pond

[Lili Crowley via mailop]

Can someone from Big Pond contact me off list?

One of our Yahoo domains is being blocked from sending to your domain.

Thanks!
Lili
Yahoo Postmaster
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

[Scott Mutter via mailop]

Nope.  Still the same.

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 9:42 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian 
wrote:

> Check again now
>
> --srs
> --
> *From:* mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 23, 2023 1:52:25 AM
> *To:* mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> Got a response from icloudad...@apple.com stating they've made changes.
> But the issue still persists.
>
> We replied back on that message, but I'm not all that convinced that
> whoever is checking the icloudad...@apple.com address actually knows what
> they are doing.  Especially since it's taken a lot of arm twisting to get
> any response at all.
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 7:56 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ok we will check
>
>
> --srs
> --
> *From:* mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 21, 2023 10:23:15 PM
> *To:* mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> Message sent again - today, 2023-09-21 11:51AM CDT.
>
> Subject of the message is - 209.236.124.55 IP Blacklisted
>
> I sent the message to icloudad...@apple.com and CC'd s...@apple.com
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:46 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you resend your message to postmaster with a recent sample of the
> logs? Bcc me at s...@apple.com so I can follow up with the team.
>
>
>
> *From: *mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Date: *Thursday, 21 September 2023 at 8:00 PM
> *To: *mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject: *Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> How long should I have to wait for a response?
>
>
>
> I haven't heard anything back and icloud is still rejecting the message
> due to local policy.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:07 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I will have the team check and reply to you
>
>
>
> *From: *Scott Mutter 
> *Date: *Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 6:28 PM
> *To: *Suresh Ramasubramanian 
> *Subject: *Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
> I wrote icloudad...@apple.com on August 26, 2023.
>
>
>
> Message was from postmas...@thoroughbred.wznoc.com
>
>
>
> Subject of the message was - 209.236.124.55 IP Blacklisted
>
>
>
> Just tried resending a message from this server, same error message:
>
>
>
>  554 5.7.1 [HM08] Message rejected due to local policy. Please visit
> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 2:08 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> What address did you email icloudadmin from?
>
> I don’t see any current blocks on your IP
>
>
>
> --srs
> --
>
> *From:* Suresh Ramasubramanian 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 19, 2023 10:33:52 AM
> *To:* Scott Mutter ; mailop@mailop.org <
> mailop@mailop.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to
> local policy
>
>
>
> I’ll have someone look at your email and reply if they haven’t yet
>
>
>
> --srs
> --
>
> *From:* mailop  on behalf of Scott Mutter via
> mailop 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 19, 2023 9:11:02 AM
> *To:* mailop@mailop.org 
> *Subject:* [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local
> policy
>
>
>
> Anybody from Apple/iCloud able to provide any insight as to why messages
> from 209.236.124.55 are being blocked with - Message rejected due to local
> policy messages?
>
>
>
> I previously sent a message to icloudad...@apple.com but got no response.
>
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Big Pond

[Bradley King via mailop]

Hi Lili,

Ive sent you a messag eoff list.

Cheers,

Brad




23 September 2023 at 12:03, "Lili Crowley via mailop"  wrote:


> 
> Can someone from Big Pond contact me off list?
> 
> One of our Yahoo domains is being blocked from sending to your domain.
> 
> Thanks! 
> Lili
> Yahoo Postmaster
>___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop