Re: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Ilja Nedilko via mailop]

I'm also very curious about this, we will actually attempt to do this with an 
external vendor later today using Amazom SES, but all parties are unsure about 
the DKIM handling here.
In our case we will be using selector for subdomain.domain.tld, and e-mail from 
sub.subdomain.domain.tld.


Best regards,

Ilja Nedilko


From: mailop  on behalf of Marco Moock via mailop 

Sent: 25 January 2024 17:17
To: mailop 
Subject: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

Hello!

At work we are currently deploying DKIM.

Do people here have experience with messages from sub.example.org
signed with d=example.org?
That way is much easier to handle for us because we have a lot of
domains (machines sending with r...@hostname.example.org etc.).

Will Google accept such messages in the future?
I am aware that DMARC can control that, but how will Google handle it?


--
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to asdfasd...@cartoonies.org
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Is Google jumping the gun for SPF / DKIM requirement?

[Grant Taylor via mailop]

On 1/25/24 01:12, Marco Moock via mailop wrote:

Both don't pass here, so fix SPF and try again.


I would hope that redacted.example.net and 192.0.2.1 fail. 
redacted.example.net is part of one of the (few) names reserved for 
documentation; specifically example.net.  Likewise 192.0.2.1 is part of 
one of the (few) subnets reserved for documentation.


That's why I chose them for my email.  The actual value of the 
non-existent SPF (TXT) record for the documentation domain is orthogonal 
to Google enforcing things ahead of the published February 1st time frame.




--
Grant. . . .


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[John Levine via mailop]

According to Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop 
:
>   I'm just chiming in here with some support for you because I know a 
>few people who use OVH as well.
>
>   Blocking on a case-by-case basis is the better approach so that 
>legitimate (non-spamming) hosts aren't penalized.

When I look at my logs and see the amount of spam from OVH networks,
it's just not worth the effort to try and pick out the trickle of
non-spam.

If you want people to accept your mail, act like you do and send it
from a network that doesn't gush spam.

-- 
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[John Levine via mailop]

It appears that Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop  said:
>Dnia 25.01.2024 o godz. 07:10:13 Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop pisze:
>> It's probably pointless to call for a general OVH boycott, as much as I
>> would like to do that :-)
>
>I would be the first to object to that, because my server is hosted at OVH :)

As I may have said once or twice before, when you pick the cheapest,
crummiest option, often you get what you pay for.

R's,
John
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Anne Mitchell via mailop]

> On Jan 25, 2024, at 3:24 PM, Byron Lunz via mailop  wrote:
> 
> Or, you can use https://aboutmy.email/ - not affiliated, just a pleased user.

Yes, absolutely, aboutmy.email rocks!  And, is offered by a very trusted source!

Anne

--- 
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.
Email Law & Policy Attorney
CEO Institute for Social Internet Public Policy (ISIPP)
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email marketing law)
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Dean Emeritus, Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
Prof. Emeritus, Lincoln Law School
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Counsel Emeritus, eMail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: MTA-STS: No TLS reports from Google since January 9th

[Brotman, Alex via mailop]

I did start getting reports again, I haven't looked to see if they're 
consistently appearing

-- 
Alex Brotman
Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy
Comcast
 

> -Original Message-
> From: mailop  On Behalf Of Byung-Hee HWANG
> via mailop
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 10:02 AM
> To: mailop@mailop.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [mailop] MTA-STS: No TLS reports from Google since
> January 9th
> 
> On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 15:26 +0100, Paul Menzel via mailop wrote:
> > Dear mail operators,
> >
> >
> > Am 17.01.24 um 10:04 schrieb Paul Menzel via mailop:
> >
> > > Since January 9th, 2024 we have not received any (MTA-STS) TLS
> > > reports from google.com (noreply-smtp-tls-report...@google.com). We
> > > still get TLS reports from other organizations.
> > >
> > > Does somebody know more?
> >
> > I got one reply, confirming the issue.
> >
> > No idea, if related to the report on this list, but since January
> > 20th,
> > 2024 I receive the reports again. In contrast to Microsoft, the
> > missing reports have not yet been sent.
> 
> Hellow Paul,
> 
> Also i'm waiting for the reports, thanks for information.
> 
> 
> Sincerely, Byung-Hee
> 
> --
> ^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))//
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop__;!!CQl3mcH
> X2A!DfPlSMTiqig3seq0-
> gEOaA_kH2xrqFtJWYqEu97sDFbcOKDoruZnQs98mv4tjgFSHRMdmf-
> FoovAnyRZX_E$
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Byron Lunz via mailop]

Or, you can use https://aboutmy.email/ - not affiliated, just a pleased
user.


On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 11:49 AM Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:

> Feel free to contact me off-list if you'd like to send some test
> messages -- I can send back the results of the DKIM and DMARC checks.
>
> My eMail address is:  postmas...@inter-corporate.com
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > At work we are currently deploying DKIM.
> >
> > Do people here have experience with messages from sub.example.org
> > signed with d=example.org?
> > That way is much easier to handle for us because we have a lot of
> > domains (machines sending with r...@hostname.example.org etc.).
> >
> > Will Google accept such messages in the future?
> > I am aware that DMARC can control that, but how will Google handle it?
> >
> >
> > --
> > kind regards
> > Marco
> >
> > Send spam to asdfasd...@cartoonies.org
> > ___
> > mailop mailing list
> > mailop@mailop.org
> > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
>
> --
> Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com
> Randolf Richardson, CNA - rand...@inter-corporate.com
> Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
> Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
> https://www.inter-corporate.com/
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop]

Thank you Richard, I'll reach out outside of the list.

Best,
Cyril

Le jeu. 25 janv. 2024 à 17:23, Thomas Mechtersheimer via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> a écrit :

> About 20 years ago I was able to register IP addresses of our
> designated mail forwarding servers at SpamCop (via mail to
> deput...@admin.spamcop.net), so that they would not get listed,
> and we don't receive reports for those.
> This still seems to be active today.
>
> Unfortunately I have not been able to update this registration since
> SpamCop introduced the Mailhost configuration somewhere around 2013.
> Looks like nowadays every recipient has to add the forwarding servers
> manually.
>
> --
> Thomas Mechtersheimer
> CSL Computer Service Langenbach GmbH
> Hansaallee 191-193
> 40549 Düsseldorf
> Telefon: +49 (211) 8 67 67-0
> Telefax: +49 (211) 8 67 67-10
> mailto: thomas.mechtershei...@csl.de
>
> CSL wird 50 - was Kunden sagen: https://csl.de
>
> Geschäftsführer: Renate Altmann-Spangenberg
> Amtsgericht Düsseldorf HRB 34900
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop]

Feel free to contact me off-list if you'd like to send some test 
messages -- I can send back the results of the DKIM and DMARC checks.

My eMail address is:  postmas...@inter-corporate.com

> Hello!
> 
> At work we are currently deploying DKIM.
> 
> Do people here have experience with messages from sub.example.org
> signed with d=example.org?
> That way is much easier to handle for us because we have a lot of
> domains (machines sending with r...@hostname.example.org etc.).
> 
> Will Google accept such messages in the future?
> I am aware that DMARC can control that, but how will Google handle it?
> 
> 
> -- 
> kind regards
> Marco
> 
> Send spam to asdfasd...@cartoonies.org
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop


-- 
Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com
Randolf Richardson, CNA - rand...@inter-corporate.com
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
https://www.inter-corporate.com/


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[Russell Clemings via mailop]

If the scammers actually had such a video, wouldn't they include a
screenshot?

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 9:03 AM Peter N. M. Hansteen via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:10:13AM +0100, Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop
> wrote:
> > Tonight we received a huge wave of extortion spams from OVH hosted
> domains
> > trying to get bitcoin payments. The senders claim that recipients watched
> > child porn.
>
> Your customers might find a tiny bit of solace in that rather conclusive
> evidence exists that the supposed videos do not in fact exist, anywhere.
>
> A rather significant subset of my "imaginary friends" (aka spamtraps) are
> at the receiving end of those campaigns at fairly frequent intervals.
>
> Your customers (and perhaps others) could usefully read my 2022 piece
> "The Despicable, No Good, Blackmail Campaign Targeting ... Imaginary
> Friends?"
> (https://www.nxdomain.no/~peter/despicable_no_good_blackmail.html or with
> nicer
> formatting plus G's trackers at
> https://bsdly.blogspot.com/2022/12/the-despicable-no-good-blackmail.html).
>
> Both versions have links to materials with more detailed information.
>
> All the best,
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
> https://bsdly.blogspot.com/ https://www.bsdly.net/ https://www.nuug.no/
> "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic"
> delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>


-- 
===
Russell Clemings

===
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] [Phishtank-users] Phish report (registration is disabled)

[Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop]

[sNip]

I apologize.  I sent this to the wrong address.  Please disregard.

-- 
Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com
Randolf Richardson, CNA - rand...@inter-corporate.com
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
https://www.inter-corporate.com/


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop]

> Dnia 25.01.2024 o godz. 07:10:13 Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop pisze:
> > It's probably pointless to call for a general OVH boycott, as much as I
> > would like to do that :-)
> 
> I would be the first to object to that, because my server is hosted at OVH :)

I'm just chiming in here with some support for you because I know a 
few people who use OVH as well.

Blocking on a case-by-case basis is the better approach so that 
legitimate (non-spamming) hosts aren't penalized.

-- 
Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com
Randolf Richardson, CNA - rand...@inter-corporate.com
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
https://www.inter-corporate.com/


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] [Phishtank-users] Phish report (registration is disabled)

[Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop]

I'd like to register so that I can contribute too, but I'm seeing 
the same message that registrations are disabled:

Phishtank :: Register
https://www.phishtank.com/register.php

"X   New user registration temporarily disabled."

Thank you.

> Hi To whom it may concern,
> 
> 
> I want to register in the website but appear the following error :New user 
> registration temporarily disabled.
> 
> Please help me to add  the following apocryphal website
> 
> the following domain is being used in a phishing campaing: 
> 
> ahogarseu76[.]online
> 
> in The following PHISHING website recently came to my attention:
> 
> hxxps://ahogarseu76[.]online/spei/
> 
> Despite what it is pretending, this is a phishing site and not the official 
> website.
> 
> hxxps://prod[.]stpmex[.]com/spei
> 
> You are providing services to the people operating the Website while it is 
> very obviously being used for fraud.
> I'm writing to request that you take it down as soon as possible.
> We attach evidence of the apocryphal site, which is currently active.
> 
> Yours faithfully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com
Randolf Richardson, CNA - rand...@inter-corporate.com
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
https://www.inter-corporate.com/


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[Peter N. M. Hansteen via mailop]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:10:13AM +0100, Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop wrote:
> Tonight we received a huge wave of extortion spams from OVH hosted domains
> trying to get bitcoin payments. The senders claim that recipients watched
> child porn.

Your customers might find a tiny bit of solace in that rather conclusive 
evidence exists that the supposed videos do not in fact exist, anywhere. 

A rather significant subset of my "imaginary friends" (aka spamtraps) are 
at the receiving end of those campaigns at fairly frequent intervals. 

Your customers (and perhaps others) could usefully read my 2022 piece 
"The Despicable, No Good, Blackmail Campaign Targeting ... Imaginary Friends?"
(https://www.nxdomain.no/~peter/despicable_no_good_blackmail.html or with nicer
formatting plus G's trackers at 
https://bsdly.blogspot.com/2022/12/the-despicable-no-good-blackmail.html).

Both versions have links to materials with more detailed information.

All the best,
Peter

-- 
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
https://bsdly.blogspot.com/ https://www.bsdly.net/ https://www.nuug.no/
"Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic"
delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[Byung-Hee HWANG via mailop]

Hellow Jaroslaw,

On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 10:13 +0100, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
> Dnia 25.01.2024 o godz. 07:10:13 Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop pisze:
> > It's probably pointless to call for a general OVH boycott, as much
> > as I
> > would like to do that :-)
> 
> I would be the first to object to that, because my server is hosted
> at OVH :)

I agree. In the same vein, I cannot do anything that violates Google
Gmail policies. Because Gmail (soyeo...@gmail.com) is my final mailbox.


Sincerely, Byung-Hee

-- 
^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))//
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Thomas Mechtersheimer via mailop]

About 20 years ago I was able to register IP addresses of our
designated mail forwarding servers at SpamCop (via mail to
deput...@admin.spamcop.net), so that they would not get listed,
and we don't receive reports for those.
This still seems to be active today.

Unfortunately I have not been able to update this registration since
SpamCop introduced the Mailhost configuration somewhere around 2013.
Looks like nowadays every recipient has to add the forwarding servers manually.

-- 
Thomas Mechtersheimer
CSL Computer Service Langenbach GmbH
Hansaallee 191-193
40549 Düsseldorf
Telefon: +49 (211) 8 67 67-0
Telefax: +49 (211) 8 67 67-10
mailto: thomas.mechtershei...@csl.de

CSL wird 50 - was Kunden sagen: https://csl.de

Geschäftsführer: Renate Altmann-Spangenberg
Amtsgericht Düsseldorf HRB 34900
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Byung-Hee HWANG via mailop]

Hellow Marco,

On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 16:17 +0100, Marco Moock via mailop wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> At work we are currently deploying DKIM.
> 
> Do people here have experience with messages from sub.example.org
> signed with d=example.org?
> That way is much easier to handle for us because we have a lot of
> domains (machines sending with r...@hostname.example.org etc.).
> 
> Will Google accept such messages in the future?
> I am aware that DMARC can control that, but how will Google handle
> it?
> 

IMHO, there is no problem. You see here:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1043539


Sincerely, Byung-Hee

-- 
^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))//
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] puzzling rejections from icloud

[Jason Wright via mailop]

We're experiencing the same issue with Apple when aligning DKIM with the
FROM and passing SPF with the sender.

Sincerely,

Jason Wright
*Postmaster & Jr. Systems Engineer*

ONTRAPORT  | Support Center
 | Schedule a Screenshare
 |


On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 7:22 AM Julian Bradfield via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:

> I run some small mailing lists for a club, and there's one member with
> an address at icloud.com that rejects (with a generic "policy"
> message) many of the messages sent to the club lists. Sometimes it's
> possibly explicable because the message was sent by somebody whose
> provider doesn't DKIM-sign.
>
> However, I've just seen one I don't understand at all. The message is from
> a
> btopenworld.com user, sent to a list at the club. When I send messages
> out, I change nothing except the envelope sender (and one or two
> diagnostic headers). So it should pass SPF (from the club), DKIM (from
> the sender) and be aligned for DKIM.
>
> icloud's message is:
>
>  5.7.1 Your message was rejected due to btopenworld.com's DMARC
> policy. See https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137 for info
>
>
> As mentioned, the message should pass DMARC. For diagnostic purposes I
> have a dummy gmail user as a member of all lists, and gmail tells me
> that this message does indeed pass SPF, DKIM, and DMARC.
> I trust Google more than Apple to get these things right :)
>
> Does anybody have a similar experience with icloud, or any other
> suggestions?
>
> thanks,
> Julian.
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>

-- 









 


Take a Platform Tour » 
  |  Become a Partner » 




___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Richard W via mailop]

Andy has the right answer here, but sometimes there are some other 
tweeks I do. Send me a couple of report numbers and I'll look, or I can 
force the user to mailhost records. service @ spamcop.net


Richard

On 2024-01-25 3:30 a.m., Andy Smith via mailop wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:

Unfortunately for us, Spamcop believe we are the one sending spam when they
trace back the Received headers, because we are the last hop before landing
to that user's inbox.

Is there a way to tell in the headers that we are merely forwarding emails
(we do have spam protection in place, but some of them always manage to get
through) ?


There's no way for you to do this, because SpamCop has no way to
know that you are "part of" the recipient's infrastructure.

SpamCop instructs its users not to ever report forwarded email if
you like I should think you could continue marking every report as
resolved or not applicable due to the fact that it's forwarded and
SpamCop would side with you (I've no special knowledge on this).

Something that a SpamCop user CAN do is register (with them) the
forwarding path, and then SpamCop will know about that. Here's the
help for that:

 
https://forum.spamcop.net/forum/7-mailhost-configuration-of-your-reporting-account/

That's something only the SpamCop user can do though, and if they're
not understanding the issue and blindly hitting "report" then that
won't help you.

The exact same problem happens when people report spam that they
received through a mailing list. The SpamCop user needs to be a bit
careful.

Thanks,
Andy


___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] DKIM signed with parent domain

[Marco Moock via mailop]

Hello!

At work we are currently deploying DKIM.

Do people here have experience with messages from sub.example.org
signed with d=example.org?
That way is much easier to handle for us because we have a lot of
domains (machines sending with r...@hostname.example.org etc.).

Will Google accept such messages in the future?
I am aware that DMARC can control that, but how will Google handle it?


-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send spam to asdfasd...@cartoonies.org
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] puzzling rejections from icloud

[Julian Bradfield via mailop]

I run some small mailing lists for a club, and there's one member with
an address at icloud.com that rejects (with a generic "policy"
message) many of the messages sent to the club lists. Sometimes it's
possibly explicable because the message was sent by somebody whose
provider doesn't DKIM-sign.

However, I've just seen one I don't understand at all. The message is from a
btopenworld.com user, sent to a list at the club. When I send messages
out, I change nothing except the envelope sender (and one or two
diagnostic headers). So it should pass SPF (from the club), DKIM (from
the sender) and be aligned for DKIM.

icloud's message is:

 5.7.1 Your message was rejected due to btopenworld.com's DMARC policy. See 
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137 for info


As mentioned, the message should pass DMARC. For diagnostic purposes I
have a dummy gmail user as a member of all lists, and gmail tells me
that this message does indeed pass SPF, DKIM, and DMARC.
I trust Google more than Apple to get these things right :)

Does anybody have a similar experience with icloud, or any other
suggestions?

thanks,
Julian.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] MTA-STS: No TLS reports from Google since January 9th

[Byung-Hee HWANG via mailop]

On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 15:26 +0100, Paul Menzel via mailop wrote:
> Dear mail operators,
> 
> 
> Am 17.01.24 um 10:04 schrieb Paul Menzel via mailop:
> 
> > Since January 9th, 2024 we have not received any (MTA-STS) TLS
> > reports 
> > from google.com (noreply-smtp-tls-report...@google.com). We still
> > get 
> > TLS reports from other organizations.
> > 
> > Does somebody know more?
> 
> I got one reply, confirming the issue.
> 
> No idea, if related to the report on this list, but since January
> 20th, 
> 2024 I receive the reports again. In contrast to Microsoft, the
> missing 
> reports have not yet been sent.

Hellow Paul,

Also i'm waiting for the reports, thanks for information.


Sincerely, Byung-Hee

-- 
^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))//
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] MTA-STS: No TLS reports from Google since January 9th

[Paul Menzel via mailop]

Dear mail operators,


Am 17.01.24 um 10:04 schrieb Paul Menzel via mailop:

Since January 9th, 2024 we have not received any (MTA-STS) TLS reports 
from google.com (noreply-smtp-tls-report...@google.com). We still get 
TLS reports from other organizations.


Does somebody know more?


I got one reply, confirming the issue.

No idea, if related to the report on this list, but since January 20th, 
2024 I receive the reports again. In contrast to Microsoft, the missing 
reports have not yet been sent.



Kind regards,

Paul
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Michael via mailop]

Interesting note in passing, some customers who also had spamcop in 
their RBL listing has noted that even some Microsoft outgoing IPs are 
appearing on that RBL.. (cannot confirm)


Not that they don't deserve it, but rejecting based on that RBL might 
cause some grief, better to use it as a scoring flag..


Still, love what SpamCop does.. our cluster has even had the odd report 
over the last couple years, and though maybe not timely, it was usually 
an accurate report of a compromised user we had already actioned 
automatically.


On 1/25/24 01:30, Andy Smith via mailop wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:

Unfortunately for us, Spamcop believe we are the one sending spam when they
trace back the Received headers, because we are the last hop before landing
to that user's inbox.

Is there a way to tell in the headers that we are merely forwarding emails
(we do have spam protection in place, but some of them always manage to get
through) ?


There's no way for you to do this, because SpamCop has no way to
know that you are "part of" the recipient's infrastructure.

SpamCop instructs its users not to ever report forwarded email if
you like I should think you could continue marking every report as
resolved or not applicable due to the fact that it's forwarded and
SpamCop would side with you (I've no special knowledge on this).

Something that a SpamCop user CAN do is register (with them) the
forwarding path, and then SpamCop will know about that. Here's the
help for that:

 
https://forum.spamcop.net/forum/7-mailhost-configuration-of-your-reporting-account/

That's something only the SpamCop user can do though, and if they're
not understanding the issue and blindly hitting "report" then that
won't help you.

The exact same problem happens when people report spam that they
received through a mailing list. The SpamCop user needs to be a bit
careful.

Thanks,
Andy



--
"Catch the Magic of Linux..."

Michael Peddemors, President/CEO LinuxMagic Inc.
Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com @linuxmagic

A Wizard IT Company - For More Info http://www.wizard.ca
"LinuxMagic" is a Registered TradeMark of Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd.

604-682-0300 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop]

Thank you Andy,

I've been in touch with some users and they are generally open minded. I
think the link you shared is really helpful and it will definitely help
everyone (us, the user, spamcop), so thank you very much for that!

Best,
Cyril

Le jeu. 25 janv. 2024 à 10:52, Andy Smith via mailop  a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop
> wrote:
> > Unfortunately for us, Spamcop believe we are the one sending spam when
> they
> > trace back the Received headers, because we are the last hop before
> landing
> > to that user's inbox.
> >
> > Is there a way to tell in the headers that we are merely forwarding
> emails
> > (we do have spam protection in place, but some of them always manage to
> get
> > through) ?
>
> There's no way for you to do this, because SpamCop has no way to
> know that you are "part of" the recipient's infrastructure.
>
> SpamCop instructs its users not to ever report forwarded email if
> you like I should think you could continue marking every report as
> resolved or not applicable due to the fact that it's forwarded and
> SpamCop would side with you (I've no special knowledge on this).
>
> Something that a SpamCop user CAN do is register (with them) the
> forwarding path, and then SpamCop will know about that. Here's the
> help for that:
>
>
> https://forum.spamcop.net/forum/7-mailhost-configuration-of-your-reporting-account/
>
> That's something only the SpamCop user can do though, and if they're
> not understanding the issue and blindly hitting "report" then that
> won't help you.
>
> The exact same problem happens when people report spam that they
> received through a mailing list. The SpamCop user needs to be a bit
> careful.
>
> Thanks,
> Andy
>
> --
> https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Andy Smith via mailop]

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:
> Unfortunately for us, Spamcop believe we are the one sending spam when they
> trace back the Received headers, because we are the last hop before landing
> to that user's inbox.
> 
> Is there a way to tell in the headers that we are merely forwarding emails
> (we do have spam protection in place, but some of them always manage to get
> through) ?

There's no way for you to do this, because SpamCop has no way to
know that you are "part of" the recipient's infrastructure.

SpamCop instructs its users not to ever report forwarded email if
you like I should think you could continue marking every report as
resolved or not applicable due to the fact that it's forwarded and
SpamCop would side with you (I've no special knowledge on this).

Something that a SpamCop user CAN do is register (with them) the
forwarding path, and then SpamCop will know about that. Here's the
help for that:


https://forum.spamcop.net/forum/7-mailhost-configuration-of-your-reporting-account/

That's something only the SpamCop user can do though, and if they're
not understanding the issue and blindly hitting "report" then that
won't help you.

The exact same problem happens when people report spam that they
received through a mailing list. The SpamCop user needs to be a bit
careful.

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Extortion spam from OVH-hosted *.sbs domains

[Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop]

Dnia 25.01.2024 o godz. 07:10:13 Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop pisze:
> It's probably pointless to call for a general OVH boycott, as much as I
> would like to do that :-)

I would be the first to object to that, because my server is hosted at OVH :)
-- 
Regards,
   Jaroslaw Rafa
   r...@rafa.eu.org
--
"In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there
was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub."
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Is Google jumping the gun for SPF / DKIM requirement?

[Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop]

Dnia 24.01.2024 o godz. 21:48:39 Grant Taylor via mailop pisze:
> 
> Am I missing something obvious or has Google started implementing
> this new requirement ahead of their published schedule?
> 
> The only surprise to me is that this happened ~8 days before the
> published February 1st date.

Apparently they started to do it quite a time ago, not only 8 days before...
-- 
Regards,
   Jaroslaw Rafa
   r...@rafa.eu.org
--
"In a million years, when kids go to school, they're gonna know: once there
was a Hushpuppy, and she lived with her daddy in the Bathtub."
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: Is Google jumping the gun for SPF / DKIM requirement?

[Marcel Becker via mailop]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:09 AM Thomas Walter via mailop 
wrote:

That said: Does anyone know if Google identifies "senders" by
> From:-Domain or IP?
>

It's documented: https://wordtothewise.com/2024/01/yahoogle-faqs/

(And I keep using Steve's blog post so I don't have to remember the URLs
myself ;-)
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] Spamcop from a forwarding standpoint

[Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop]

Hey everyone!

I'm running ImprovMX.com, an email forwarding service and I'd appreciate
your advice on a situation I can't find a solution for.

Some of my users are using Spamcop to notify them of spam abuse, which is
good thing to do to fight spam.
Unfortunately for us, Spamcop believe we are the one sending spam when they
trace back the Received headers, because we are the last hop before landing
to that user's inbox.

Is there a way to tell in the headers that we are merely forwarding emails
(we do have spam protection in place, but some of them always manage to get
through) ?

Or is there someone from Spamcop in this list I can discuss with about how
to find a working solution?

I thought about ARC, which would be a good solution to this, but ARC is
useless (can't trust the signing domain) so it's out of the question.

Thank you for your help!

Best regards,
Cyril
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Is Google jumping the gun for SPF / DKIM requirement?

[Laura Atkins via mailop]

> On 25 Jan 2024, at 07:57, Thomas Walter via mailop  wrote:
> 
> Moin,
> 
> On 25.01.24 04:48, Grant Taylor via mailop wrote:
>> I knew that Google was going to start requiring SPF or DKIM (in addition to 
>> other sender guidelines [1].  But I thought they were starting February 1st, 
>> per their own sender guidelines.
> 
> Just to clarify, because some of our customers were irritated by marketing 
> emails from newsletter services.
> 
> It's SPF or  DKIM for < 5000 emails per day, but
> it's SPF AND DKIM AND DMARC for >=5000 emails per day.
> 
> That said: Does anyone know if Google identifies "senders" by From:-Domain or 
> IP?

Most of the new regs include alignment so I’m expecting this is a domain based 
“sender” calculation. Google has never been IP reputation heavy anyway and have 
generally focused on domain reputation and ensuring domain alignment. 

laura

-- 
The Delivery Expert

Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
la...@wordtothewise.com

Delivery hints and commentary: http://wordtothewise.com/blog






___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Is Google jumping the gun for SPF / DKIM requirement?

[Thomas Walter via mailop]

Moin,

On 25.01.24 04:48, Grant Taylor via mailop wrote:
I knew that Google was going to start requiring SPF or DKIM (in addition 
to other sender guidelines [1].  But I thought they were starting 
February 1st, per their own sender guidelines.


Just to clarify, because some of our customers were irritated by 
marketing emails from newsletter services.


It's SPF or  DKIM for < 5000 emails per day, but
it's SPF AND DKIM AND DMARC for >=5000 emails per day.

That said: Does anyone know if Google identifies "senders" by 
From:-Domain or IP?


Regards,
Thomas Walter

--
Thomas Walter
Datenverarbeitungszentrale

FH Münster
- University of Applied Sciences -
Corrensstr. 25, Raum B 112
48149 Münster

Tel: +49 251 83 64 908
Fax: +49 251 83 64 910
www.fh-muenster.de/dvz/


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop