Re: [mailop] What do other ISP / ESP do about the MailChimp spam problem?

2018-11-06 Thread Charles McKean 
If you had any honest question here, you got it wrong by laying on the
insult and making leading statements. Since you are acting like a
troll, I think we should treat you like a troll and tell you to go
away.

I get so many spams, but I have not gotten a spam from a Mailchimp
customer for as long as I can remember. There are many other email
services providers that are much worse. Mailchimp is not the problem
for most of us, so perhaps the question to ask is, are you the
outlier? And if so, why? Are your filters broken?
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 7:07 AM Benoit Panizzon  wrote:
>
> Hi List
>
> We again face problems with services by MailChimp.
>
> Their platform is equally fashioned by serious companies sending
> permission based newsletters and by very persistent repetitive spamer.
>
> They repeatedly get blacklisted on our platform, because of recipient
> complaints.
>
> Then repeatedly customers having subscribed to newsletters from serious
> companies complain to us, because mailchimp is blocked by our anti-spam
> services.
>
> The customer reporting spam are not those who subscribed to
> newsletters, forget about it and them report opt-in emails as spam.
>
> No, the problem is that MailChimp operates under 'US' marketing laws
> where the sender is only obliged to provide an 'opt-out' link in spam he
> sends and does not have to require the recipient to have a validated
> opt-in to get advertisement emails.
>
> So often, the spamers use harvested email addresses (even spamtraps we
> have hidden of websites) or lists they bought online.
>
> The other problem is about GDPR, where laws in most European countries
> require the sender of advertisement to disclose the source of data of a
> recipient to this recipient.
>
> Spamers sending email over mailchimp are clever. The links in the email
> point to some anonymous redirection services to mailchimp themselves or
> to domains registered via anonymizing proxies. Payment work over
> paypal and if you have been trying to get at the identity of a fraudster
> who took money via paypal, you know this is not possible. So the
> recipient of spam needs to contact the 'sender' aka MailChimp and
> requires MailChimp to disclose the identity of the sender, which
> MailChimp then again rejects pointing to US privacy laws which require
> them not to disclose the identity of their customers. Safe Heaven for
> Spamer!
>
> MailChimp does close accounts for which they get a certain number of
> complaints, but they fail to recognize and block the same spamer who
> repeatedly opens news accounts.
>
> So what do you think should ISP and Email Plattform operators do about
> MailChimp?
>
> * Tell the customers complaining about spam they have to live with it?
> * Block MailChimp and tell serious companies who get blocked as
>   collateral damage, to look for another, not so spamer firendly ESP?
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüssen
>
> -Benoît Panizzon-
> --
> I m p r o W a r e   A G-Leiter Commerce Kunden
> __
>
> Zurlindenstrasse 29 Tel  +41 61 826 93 00
> CH-4133 PrattelnFax  +41 61 826 93 01
> Schweiz Web  http://www.imp.ch
> __
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Anyone from iWeb around? (And generally feel free to block/list the below)

2018-04-13 Thread Charles McKean 
Dear whole internet, Anni got a spam? I beg you, please do not turn
this into SDLU.

Is this an operational issue ? Is a system down ?

They sent many millions of spams and the ISP ignored your report for
many months ?

No? Then...

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Anne P. Mitchell Esq.
 wrote:
> Is there anyone from iWeb here? And generally, this spammer - and his many 
> domains - needs a lesson :-\
>
> Anne
>
>
>> From: "Anne P. Mitchell Esq." 
>> Subject: Spam and Violation of Law complaint
>> Date: April 13, 2018 at 12:39:26 PM MDT
>> To: ab...@iweb.com, Enom Domain Abuse , ab...@ultradns.com
>>
>>

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Issues delivering to Hotmail addresses

2018-01-23 Thread Charles McKean 
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 9:41 PM, Joe Hamelin  wrote:
> It means they should have stuck to BSD and sendmail. ;)

Now somebody else will pop up and tell them to submit a ticket and
they will reply that they have submitted 6 tickets and Microsoft isn't
responding to them.

SOMETHING IS BADLY BROKEN OVER AT MICROSOFT, FOLKS.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail/Outlook feedback loop processing delay?

2018-01-09 Thread Charles McKean 
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Bill Cole
 wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2018, at 14:53, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
>> Also, another user here reported that recently Microsoft introduced
>> automations so that an user moving messages from inbox to spam via
>> IMAP (also in bulk) automatically create abuse reports/FBL.
>
> That's horrifying. It's oblivious bulk misreporting by conscious design.

And yours is hyperbole, overstating an opinion grossly in an attempt
to draw a response.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Anyone with a pulse at combell.com?

2018-01-08 Thread Charles McKean 
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Philip Paeps  wrote:

>> Did you try it with a non-"trouble.is" domain?
>
> Yes.  I sent these from postmaster@ the several domains where the spamtraps
> are hosted and from philip@ in the domains I've got mailboxes in.  Always
> the same error: "Message rejected as spam by Content Filtering".
>
>> E.g. an @gmail.com account?
>
>
> I don't have one of those.

Why not? Cost too high?

I was able to contact them just now and open a ticket with them using
the abuse address. Do not include the spam report and instead explain
that your reports are getting rejected and ask them what they expect
you to do to get this through to them.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] TWC refusing mail

2017-12-18 Thread Charles McKean 
Glad to hear that. Thank you for sharing. It is not always easy to
tell what is going on from the outside.

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Scott Undercofler <sco...@huenix.com> wrote:
> Yes. We are much smarter than that.
>
>
>> On Dec 18, 2017, at 7:38 AM, Charles McKean <charles.mckean.ml...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Or, perhaps TWC has made the very questionable choice to implement
>> SORBS on a real ISP mail server. That would be one way to hold down
>> load. Just randomly block a whole bunch of IP addresses that aren't
>> actually spam sources.
>>
>> The people at TWC are smarter than this, yes? Please tell me it isn't so.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Scott Undercofler <sco...@huenix.com> wrote:
>>> Between outlook and .nl and .eu, we have been hammering away at spam the
>>> last few weeks so some senders have been, perhaps unfairly, caught up in the
>>> net. We weathered the holiday mail really well but have been pretty harsh on
>>> snowshoers and hit and run spammers.
>>>
>>> On Dec 17, 2017, at 6:13 PM, Andrew Barrett <andrew.barr...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm guessing that, like everyone else, TWC is just getting slammed with mail
>>> sent by ESPs  for senders with holiday offers and the like, and is just not
>>> as well equipped to handle it. Seems like every holiday season brings new
>>> record volumes.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Michael Rathbun <m...@honet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 08:57:34 +1100, Mark Dale <m...@mailmanlists.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Is it just us or are others experiencing this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any clues as to why would be greatly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> We're seeing it, with a sudden onset on the 14th.  The IPs send requested
>>>> and/or transactional email, have excellent reputations, and are blocked
>>>> nowhere else.
>>>>
>>>> The response is completely uncharacteristic of the rejections outlined on
>>>> the
>>>> postmaster page.
>>>>
>>>> The TWC IP reputation lookup gives clean bill of health.  Since there are
>>>> no
>>>> blocks, no remediation can be requested.
>>>>
>>>> mdr
>>>> --
>>>>The Duckage Is Feep.
>>>>   -- Vaul Pixie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> mailop mailing list
>>>> mailop@mailop.org
>>>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> mailop mailing list
>>> mailop@mailop.org
>>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> mailop mailing list
>>> mailop@mailop.org
>>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> mailop mailing list
>> mailop@mailop.org
>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] TWC refusing mail

2017-12-18 Thread Charles McKean 
Or, perhaps TWC has made the very questionable choice to implement
SORBS on a real ISP mail server. That would be one way to hold down
load. Just randomly block a whole bunch of IP addresses that aren't
actually spam sources.

The people at TWC are smarter than this, yes? Please tell me it isn't so.

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Scott Undercofler  wrote:
> Between outlook and .nl and .eu, we have been hammering away at spam the
> last few weeks so some senders have been, perhaps unfairly, caught up in the
> net. We weathered the holiday mail really well but have been pretty harsh on
> snowshoers and hit and run spammers.
>
> On Dec 17, 2017, at 6:13 PM, Andrew Barrett 
> wrote:
>
> I'm guessing that, like everyone else, TWC is just getting slammed with mail
> sent by ESPs  for senders with holiday offers and the like, and is just not
> as well equipped to handle it. Seems like every holiday season brings new
> record volumes.
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 7:53 PM, Michael Rathbun  wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 08:57:34 +1100, Mark Dale 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Is it just us or are others experiencing this?
>> >
>> >Any clues as to why would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> We're seeing it, with a sudden onset on the 14th.  The IPs send requested
>> and/or transactional email, have excellent reputations, and are blocked
>> nowhere else.
>>
>> The response is completely uncharacteristic of the rejections outlined on
>> the
>> postmaster page.
>>
>> The TWC IP reputation lookup gives clean bill of health.  Since there are
>> no
>> blocks, no remediation can be requested.
>>
>> mdr
>> --
>> The Duckage Is Feep.
>>-- Vaul Pixie
>>
>>
>> ___
>> mailop mailing list
>> mailop@mailop.org
>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail and 4.5.1 4.7.500 Server Busy with some

2017-11-09 Thread Charles McKean 
Legal? Was that a threat? Do you have prior experience attacking a
lunatic asylum with a banana? Best of luck.

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Emre Üst |euro.message|
 wrote:
> Hello Michael ,
>
> Your support team no longer answers the tickets. We still keep getting the
> 4xx error as server busy.
>
> When will a legal explanation come from Hotmail (or Microsoft)?
>
> Thank you
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:21 PM, Michael Wise 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> The AS codes are internal IDs, and are not ASNs.
>>
>> Each one means something different.
>>
>> Conflating the different codes is pretty much the same as saying, "My Mail
>> Was Blocked!"
>>
>> It's not overly helpful in diagnosing the issue.
>>
>>
>>
>> Again, open a ticket; it's the only wat to get visibility on general
>> issues.
>>
>>
>>
>>   https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=614866
>>
>>
>>
>> Aloha,
>>
>> Michael.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Michael J Wise
>> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>>
>> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>>
>> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Maarten Oelering [mailto:maar...@postmastery.net]
>> Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 12:22 AM
>> To: Benjamin BILLON 
>> Cc: "Emre Üst |euro.message|" ; mailop@mailop.org;
>> Michael Wise 
>> Subject: Re: [mailop] Hotmail and 4.5.1 4.7.500 Server Busy with some
>>
>>
>>
>> We are seeing this error on specific sender IPs. So “Server busy” may be
>> intentionally and dependent on the sender.
>>
>> There are also many versions of this error, with at least 6 different AS
>> codes. Some occur after MAIL FROM, some occur after RCPT TO, and some occur
>> after DATA.
>>
>>
>>
>> Previously Hotmail said something like “We have limits for how many
>> messages can be sent per hour and per day”. Very useful, you knew that
>> reputation was the issue.
>>
>> Now we just see “Server busy” with an internal code, and we have to guess
>> what’s wrong. It would be helpful to know more about these AS codes. Or at
>> least which ones are sender issues and which ones receiver issues. This will
>> also relieve Microsoft support I guess.
>>
>>
>>
>> Maarten Oelering
>>
>> Postmastery
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3 Nov 2017, at 07:49, Benjamin BILLON via mailop 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry to interrupt, I just have a suggestion that maybe Michael could
>> forward internally: there used to have a Status page for various Microsoft
>> services, it either moved to some secret place or was removed. There's now a
>> page for Office365 clients (however being myself client the page generates
>> an asp error, but that's not the purpose of my message).
>>
>>
>>
>> Could there be such a page somewhere again? If there are issues, just
>> being aware of them will already help ESPs and senders to 1) be patient and
>> 2) show to their clients or boss that yes, it happens, ISPs can have outages
>> or problems too.
>>
>> I have no idea what format it would take, probably a "working / not
>> working" flag wouldn't be very useful, unless it's service by service (but I
>> don't think MS would disclose such level of details).
>>
>> Knowing if it's geographically limited could be interesting to.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is it a realistic suggestion, or should I put this dream in the shredder?
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-11-03 14:19 GMT+08:00 Emre Üst |euro.message| :
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Yes we are still seeing same code .
>>
>> 2017-11-03 09:17:02 "451 4.7.500 Server busy. Please try again later
>> from []. (AS3110)" received from hotmail-com.olc.protection.outlook.com
>> (104.47.5.33) matching /451 4.7.500 Server busy/
>>
>> We cant send even 1000 mails to Hotmail per day .
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Michael Wise 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This may be related to an incident a few days ago.
>>
>> Are you still seeing the 4xx retry results?
>>
>>
>>
>> Aloha,
>>
>> Michael.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Michael J Wise
>> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>>
>> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>>
>> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Emre Üst |euro.message| [mailto:emre@euromsg.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 1:05 PM
>> To: Michael Wise 
>> Cc: mailop@mailop.org
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [mailop] Hotmail and 4.5.1 4.7.500 Server Busy with some
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Michael ,
>>
>> Unfortunately , it doesnt work . Outlook Support team said that there is
>> not blocking on their side .
>>
>> Although the ips are Returnpath certified. Sometimes we also get 421
>> RP-001 (BAY004-MC2F28) errors. But mostly 451 4.7.500 Server busy.
>> Meanwhile, on snds I see that there is a lot of difference between the
>> number of RCPT fields and Message recipientss.
>>
>> For Exp.
>>
>>
>> RCPT
>> commands  111829
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [mailop] Gmail forwarding blowback

2017-11-08 Thread Charles McKean 
> 2017-11-08 21:46 GMT+02:00 Brandon Long via mailop :
>> GSuite users can also denote a host as an inbound gateway to get around this 
>> problem, but I was never able to get the resources to have gmail users have 
>> the same ability.  It's possible this is something we could use arc for.

I humbly suggest that this is a problem that perhaps does not need to
be solved. If it's spam, don't forward it. Isn't this essentially what
Gmail does today, if a user sets up forwarding? Any mail trapped in
the spam folder will not be forwarded, if I recall correctly.

There was discussion around this in the past where AOL's forwarding
servers (I think) would add an x-spam tag, and the consensus from the
community at the time seemed to be, if you know that it's garbage, why
would you send it to me? The intent was good -- it was meant to help
the receiving site decide how to route the mail based on how the
forwarding site felt about it. But again, this is only useful if you
buy the argument that this particular email message should have been
forwarded to begin with.

___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop