Re: [mailop] Uptick in Google Groups spam?
On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 08:54:27PM +0200, Ángel via mailop wrote: > On 2024-08-28 at 14:48 -0400, Mark E. Mallett via mailop wrote: > > PS: I was just looking at the archive hosted at googlegroups on a > > couple of them, and I notice that the "show original" item on the > > message reading dropdown, which is what you would use in gmail to > > look at the headers, is grayed out. I can't see an equivalent way to > > look at the headers there, but then again I'm not really planning on > > digging into it. > > I think you need to be logged in into a Google account (and that > account being subscribed to the list?) in order to view that. Thanks.. I was logged in, and looking at the lists that that account was subscribed to. Maybe there's some other step. Or some other issue. mm ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Uptick in Google Groups spam?
On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 07:46:36AM -0500, Robert Giles via mailop wrote: > So dropping Google Groups entirely: since Google's infrastructure is > "unblockable", I'd suspect keying on a Google Groups-specific header, but > how are you (and other folks) accomplishing this? As somebody else mentioned- that's fine if you or nobody on your system(s) is subscribed to a google groups list (or never will be, then again such a rule would probably make "never will be" happen) I'm on (I think) 7 such lists. At least one of them (beancount) is quite active. Only one (redo, a build system) is getting flooded with spam, and that just recently. -mm- PS: I was just looking at the archive hosted at googlegroups on a couple of them, and I notice that the "show original" item on the message reading dropdown, which is what you would use in gmail to look at the headers, is grayed out. I can't see an equivalent way to look at the headers there, but then again I'm not really planning on digging into it. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Mailserver software
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:04:09PM -0500, Chris Adams via mailop wrote: > I ran sendmail for many years, got my release notes entries to show for > it. :) It was kind of neat to be able to do wacky things with what was > essentially a programming language config, but now I think there's > better ways to get most of the same stuff done with milters, policy > maps, etc. I ran sendmail for a decade or so starting in mid-1980s. For much of that time it was all raw sendmail.cf hacking where you had to pretty much invent anything you wanted (e.g. virtual domains), when at the time it was difficult if not impossible to even find anybody else who wanted it, let alone had done it, espcially without web search. (usenet, sure.) But I moved on. When some of these things became standardized with features and whatnot, sometimes it was harder to adapt them to fit what I wanted. -mm-(early impression: oh cool, it's kinda like prolog) ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Mailserver software
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 05:08:49PM +0200, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > Am 15.07.2024 um 22:39:34 Uhr schrieb Jeff Pang via mailop: > > > When I deploy a new mailserver, I consider postfix, exim and qmail. > > At least when visiting the website, qmail's last release is more than > 25 years ago. That is something I entirely don't recommend to use. I'm not sure that even 25 years ago the official version (from the website, unpatched) was completely usable). Most anyone running it has probably applied some of the many patches that have been written, and removed and/or replaced some of the original code. That's kind of a daunting approach when using it from scratch these days, although some suppliers and OSes make it a bit easy. Then again (just to babble on), I've been running it for about that length of time on some systems. I originally picked it because I didn't care for anything else back then, and I liked the way some of the controls were managed. Plus it was built so that parts of it could be easily replaced, and I did replace a bunch of parts and change others. -mm-(My third post here this year I think. I'm on fire.) ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] (Mis)use of DKIM's length tag and it's impact on DMARC and BIMI
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 02:11:04PM -0700, Brandon Long via mailop wrote: > I guess the part that's new to me is the apparent widespread (enough) use > of the l= > parameter. I don't recall ever noticing its use before, though can't say > it was ever top > of mind when looking at various headers of messages. I had noticed receiving some with l=1 not too long ago and went looking and saw some others with l=0. I thought it was pretty weird, especially the 1, but didn't record any details about it. mm (although it was kind of interesting that it passed) ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Samsung and SIZE
I happened to see Samsung's email app send a SIZE parameter (rfc1870) to MAIL command without the capability being advertised. I wonder if this is a known thing, it's a difficult question to google. For me anyway. I don't know details about phone or app versions, other than that it's probably recent. This is just a random note. I doubt it affects anyone but it's still wrong. -mm- (plus, how often do I get to post here?) ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
