Re: Testing updated SPF record
28/11/20 12:06 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Ming ಬರೆದರು: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 03:04:16AM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > > 28/11/20 10:33 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Ming ಬರೆದರು: > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 01:26:06PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > > > > Testing updated record :P > > > > > > > > By the way, if anyone has a better way of testing whether an SPF record > > > > is working correctly, please let me know! I don't really want to spam > > > > the list with these kinds of emails unless I have to, although I > > > > *think* this should work. > > > > > > > > 26/11/20 18:14 ನಲ್ಲಿ, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ ಬರೆದರು: > > > > > Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports > > > > > after I updated my SPF record on my domain. > > > > > > You can use some free online tools, like: > > > http://www.mail-tester.com/ > > > https://dkimvalidator.com/ > > > > > > They all include detection of SPF records. > > > > Yes, I can see what the records are using a variety of methods (including > > those sites). However, it's hard for me to tell if sending emails to this > > list will trigger DMARC records due to SPF, and those sites don't help with > > that. Regardless, I *think* this should be fixed after editing my SPF > > record. > > In fact, I think the DMARC problem is unsolvable. > > I am running a mail server of my own. In the DMARC report I received, > all the detections of SPF records form the mail forwarded through > mailing list were fail (some dkim records also fail, like > lists.claws-mail.org, it will modify your email subject). > > This is an obvious problem. As a forwarder, the mailing list is > "pretending" to be us sending emails (The From field in the mail forwarded > through the mailing list is still us). Add ip address of the > mailing list to your SPF record may solve the problem, but I don’t think > you can add the ip addresses of all mailing lists. Unless you can > guarantee that you will not join new mailing lists, you have to modify > the SPF records frequently. I tried using include:mutt.org in my SPF record so that the mailing list's SPF would be included. I'm not sure if it worked though. > > If you just don’t want to receive tons of DMARC reports, I don’t think > you should set the rua item in your DMARC records. "rua" is used for > aggregate feedback, even if your spf and dkim are both pass in auth > results, they will still send a DMARC reports to you(at least for gmail). Ahhh, I misunderstood how the DMARC record works. I want to get aggregate reports to see when things fail (since very few servers actually send out forensic reports right now), so I'll have to leave rua on and just deal with the DMARC reports. Since there's no way to quell the aggregate reports (since, as you said, they send them out regardless), I'll leave those on to make sure my email is passing and then probably disable the rua parameter. This is the first time I'm extensively using my custom domain in the "Real World"™, so I want to be sure everything works as expected. Thanks for the clarification! Sincerely, Chiraag -- ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ Pronouns: he/him/his publickey - mailinglist@chiraag.me - b0c8d720.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Testing updated SPF record
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 03:04:16AM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > 28/11/20 10:33 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Ming ಬರೆದರು: > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 01:26:06PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > > > Testing updated record :P > > > > > > By the way, if anyone has a better way of testing whether an SPF record > > > is working correctly, please let me know! I don't really want to spam the > > > list with these kinds of emails unless I have to, although I *think* this > > > should work. > > > > > > 26/11/20 18:14 ನಲ್ಲಿ, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ ಬರೆದರು: > > > > Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports > > > > after I updated my SPF record on my domain. > > > > You can use some free online tools, like: > > http://www.mail-tester.com/ > > https://dkimvalidator.com/ > > > > They all include detection of SPF records. > > Yes, I can see what the records are using a variety of methods (including > those sites). However, it's hard for me to tell if sending emails to this > list will trigger DMARC records due to SPF, and those sites don't help with > that. Regardless, I *think* this should be fixed after editing my SPF record. In fact, I think the DMARC problem is unsolvable. I am running a mail server of my own. In the DMARC report I received, all the detections of SPF records form the mail forwarded through mailing list were fail (some dkim records also fail, like lists.claws-mail.org, it will modify your email subject). This is an obvious problem. As a forwarder, the mailing list is "pretending" to be us sending emails (The From field in the mail forwarded through the mailing list is still us). Add ip address of the mailing list to your SPF record may solve the problem, but I don’t think you can add the ip addresses of all mailing lists. Unless you can guarantee that you will not join new mailing lists, you have to modify the SPF records frequently. If you just don’t want to receive tons of DMARC reports, I don’t think you should set the rua item in your DMARC records. "rua" is used for aggregate feedback, even if your spf and dkim are both pass in auth results, they will still send a DMARC reports to you(at least for gmail). -- OpenPGP fingerprint: 3C47 5977 4819 267E DD64 C7E4 6332 5675 A739 C74E signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing updated SPF record
28/11/20 10:33 ನಲ್ಲಿ, Ming ಬರೆದರು: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 01:26:06PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > > Testing updated record :P > > > > By the way, if anyone has a better way of testing whether an SPF record is > > working correctly, please let me know! I don't really want to spam the list > > with these kinds of emails unless I have to, although I *think* this should > > work. > > > > 26/11/20 18:14 ನಲ್ಲಿ, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ ಬರೆದರು: > > > Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports > > > after I updated my SPF record on my domain. > > You can use some free online tools, like: > http://www.mail-tester.com/ > https://dkimvalidator.com/ > > They all include detection of SPF records. Yes, I can see what the records are using a variety of methods (including those sites). However, it's hard for me to tell if sending emails to this list will trigger DMARC records due to SPF, and those sites don't help with that. Regardless, I *think* this should be fixed after editing my SPF record. - Chiraag -- ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ Pronouns: he/him/his publickey - mailinglist@chiraag.me - b0c8d720.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Testing updated SPF record
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 01:26:06PM +, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ wrote: > Testing updated record :P > > By the way, if anyone has a better way of testing whether an SPF record is > working correctly, please let me know! I don't really want to spam the list > with these kinds of emails unless I have to, although I *think* this should > work. > > 26/11/20 18:14 ನಲ್ಲಿ, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ ಬರೆದರು: > > Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports after > > I updated my SPF record on my domain. You can use some free online tools, like: http://www.mail-tester.com/ https://dkimvalidator.com/ They all include detection of SPF records. -- OpenPGP fingerprint: 3C47 5977 4819 267E DD64 C7E4 6332 5675 A739 C74E signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing updated SPF record
Testing updated record :P By the way, if anyone has a better way of testing whether an SPF record is working correctly, please let me know! I don't really want to spam the list with these kinds of emails unless I have to, although I *think* this should work. 26/11/20 18:14 ನಲ್ಲಿ, ಚಿರಾಗ್ ನಟರಾಜ್ ಬರೆದರು: > Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports after I > updated my SPF record on my domain. publickey - mailinglist@chiraag.me - b0c8d720.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Testing updated SPF record
Please ignore. I'm trying to see whether I get tons of DMARC reports after I updated my SPF record on my domain. publickey - mailinglist@chiraag.me - b0c8d720.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Help testing 1.11 BETA tarball
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 06:38:13PM -0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > The 1.11 release is coming up in about three weeks. This time I'm > trying something different and have prepared a BETA tarball to get > testing/feedback in advance. The translation files haven't been updated > yet, but the tarball is at: . I built mutt tonight from https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt.git hash c9ab855, works great. Last update was *today* but not sure if it's 1.11. Just wanted to thank you for all the work you do on this *amazing* mail client. I use it every day at work. My email load there is unmanageable when using ms outlook. thanks, -- Ben Fitzgerald
Help testing 1.11 BETA tarball
Hi Everyone, The 1.11 release is coming up in about three weeks. This time I'm trying something different and have prepared a BETA tarball to get testing/feedback in advance. The translation files haven't been updated yet, but the tarball is at: . The long list of changes is at the bottom of this email, but there are three main features I'd like to especially note for testing/feedback: 1. IMAP CONDSTORE and QRESYNC support. If your IMAP server supports QRESYNC, please enable $imap_qresync and $imap_condstore. (Alas, Gmail users should not do this. It doesn't support QRESYNC and enabling CONDSTORE actually appears to slow Gmail down.) In theory, QRESYNC should make it much faster to open mailboxes, after the initial sync. I've tried to test this with FastMail and Dovecot, but I don't really use IMAP daily. It would be nice to hear from others whether the feature works for you. How do you test for support? Enable 'mutt -d 2', connect to the server and disconnect. Then peek in ~/.muttdebug0: grep for 'CAPABILITY' and then for 'QRESYNC' inside those lines. 2. Inotify mailbox monitoring. This is enabled by default (but can be turned off with --disable-filemonitor). This should allow Mutt to notice mailbox changes much faster. Note that standard polling still occurs via $mail_check and $timeout, so inotify overflows shouldn't result in Mutt failing to notice new mail. 3. Dynamic $index_format content using patterns. See <https://muttmua.gitlab.io/mutt/manual-dev.html#index-format-hook> for an explanation and examples. This is fairly general purpose, but can be used to dynamically format dates for instance. I just added this, so would appreciate some testing. How to compile == On Debian-derived distros, I recommend % sudo apt build-dep mutt % sudo apt install libkyotocabinet-dev Here's the configuration I use, as a starting point. If you use another header cache backend, you'll need to fiddle with the last few arguments: % ./configure \ --prefix=/usr/local \ --with-mailpath=/var/mail \ --enable-debug \ --enable-fcntl \ --enable-gpgme \ --enable-hcache \ --enable-imap \ --enable-smtp \ --enable-pop\ --enable-sidebar\ --enable-compressed \ --with-curses \ --with-gnutls \ --with-sasl \ --with-gss \ --with-idn2 \ --with-mixmaster\ --without-gdbm \ --without-bdb \ --without-qdbm \ --without-tokyocabinet \ --with-kyotocabinet You may need to use --with-idn instead, if your system doesn't have a new IDN2 installed. Also, note that you may want to remove your old header cache files when updating, especially if you compiled with a different backend. The longer list of updates: === (though I may have missed a few things) * inotify mailbox monitoring on Linux * OAUTHBEARER support for IMAP, SMTP and POP See https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/commit/798f749eeeb98ed04028521a2eb3e505c1a83574 * manually updates mailbox statistics, like $mail_check_stats when set * Thread limited views, e.g. ~(pattern), now show new mail as it arrives. * -z and -Z options now work for IMAP mailboxes * IMAP CONDSTORE and QRESYNC support. Set $imap_condstore and/or $imap_qresync to try them out. Note that GMail doesn't support QRESYNC and enabling CONDSTORE can actually make it slower, so please don't enable for GMail. * $abort_noattach now skips quoted lines (as defined by $quote_regexp and $smileys). * The initial IMAP message downloading can be aborted with Ctrl-C. * composes a message to the sender of the selected message. (This also works from the attachment menu) * Address book queries now support multibyte (multicolumn) output * pgpring has been renamed to mutt_pgpring. * Cert prompts now show sha-256 and sha-1 * Non-threaded $sort_aux "reverse-" settings now actually work * Gnu info formatted documentation is generated. * index-format-hook and the new %@name@ expando for $index_format all dynamic index formats using pattern matching. See https://muttmua.gitlab.io/mutt/manual-dev.html#index-format-hook Thanks everyone! -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing mail list?
* munk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-05-13 20:03]: Is there a test mailing list I can use to check I have various settings in mutt setup correctly? www.yahoogroups.com - hint hint! Sven
Re: Testing mail list?
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:20:34AM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote: * munk [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-05-13 20:03]: Is there a test mailing list I can use to check I have various settings in mutt setup correctly? www.yahoogroups.com - hint hint! Sven memeep, thanx sven :) Main reason was to check the effect the lists/subscribe config settings had on adding headers to mails returned to the list via the 'reply-to-list' command (ie 'Mail-Followup-To:' in particular). I read about it in your muttrc FAQ as it goes (the confusion about what exactly list/subscribe settings actually do*): a href=http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/setup.html;http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/setup.html/a and was just wanting to test the settings out on a live mailing list. Which I've now done heh - and it's all good :) Thanx for reply, Jez (Configuring new ADSL modem/router!!! yay ;-) -- Jez Hancock - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://munkboxen.mine.nu - FreeBSD network http://www.freebsd.org - Probably the best OS in the world...
Testing mail list?
Hi, Is there a test mailing list I can use to check I have various settings in mutt setup correctly? Thanks in advance, Jez -- http://munkboxen.mine.nu - FreeBSD network http://www.freebsd.org
Re: Testing mail list?
Jez -- ...and then munk said... % % Hi, Hello! % % Is there a test mailing list I can use to check I have various settings in mutt setup correctly? Well, you've used this one, so I guess there you go. Next time send mail to yourself or to a pal instead of all of us :-) % % Thanks in advance, HTH HAND tell your editor to keep your lines short % % Jez % -- % http://munkboxen.mine.nu - FreeBSD network % http://www.freebsd.org :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg28062/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
testing
Is this address working?
Re: testing
* On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 09:32:09AM -0400, Rebecca Wu wrote: Is this address working? neee ;) Gruß, Clemens -- sig_29 Mit statserial/setserial serielle Infos abfragen: $ statserial /dev/ttyS0 (Ausgabe u.a. Signal und Pin) $ setserial /dev/ttyS0 (Ausgabe u.a. Port und IRQ) [Info: man setserial; man statserial] ---
testing procmail
I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very* new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail. jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ -
Re: testing procmail
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, J McKitrick wrote: I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very* new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail. Check out 'man procmailex' It's nothing but example .procmailrc's. If you search for 'backup' in the man page it'll give you a recipe you can put at the top of your .procmailrc to store all your mail in a backup file before it tries to process the message. Be careful with that recipe though, I think it's setup for Maildir and not mbox format. Jag
Re: testing procmail
I got started with this...and it helped out very much http://www.ii.com/internet/robots/procmail/qs/ /jgh - Original Message - From: Jag [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 11:12 am Subject: Re: testing procmail On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, J McKitrick wrote: I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very* new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail. Check out 'man procmailex' It's nothing but example .procmailrc's. If you search for 'backup' in the man page it'll give you a recipe you can put at the top of your .procmailrc to store all your mail in a backup file before it tries to process the message. Be careful with that recipe though, I think it's setup for Maildir and not mbox format. Jag
Re: testing procmail
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 11:30:07AM -0500, J McKitrick wrote: I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very* new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail. Check out http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/info/proctips.html. Specifically, look at Tip #2: Building a test-bench. How can I test individual procmail recipes? -- Thanks, Jon Walthour, BSCD Cincinnati, Ohio ~~~ The 21st century begins on January 1, 2001
Re: testing procmail
There is an excellent procmail FAQ. It shows you step-by-step method to test the procmail. If it worked for me, it must be easy. I was able to set up procmail in my personal mail account w/o any problem. However, I'm having trouble w/ my work mail account. For some reason I can not "|" or write to file from my .forward file which renders my procmail useless. It says I don't have the right shell. Oh well, I'll probably have to look somewhere else for the answer. * J McKitrick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [000315 08:49]: I'm trying to test procmail with mutt. I'm new to mutt, and *very* new to procmail I used a friend's procmailrc as a template, but i need to know if there s a way to test it without losing mail. jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ - -- -- Robert W. Kim e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: testing procmail
Well, i took your advice, and according to the test, this should work. I tried the most basic possible procmail filter: I'm trying to match subjects with 'test' in them. But every time i send myself such a message, it disappears into oblivion. The procmail rule sends it to 'chat', which is a mailbox ~/mail/chat But it never shows up in chat. No thing returns from the mailing, no errors. It just disappears. jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ -
Re: testing procmail
Nevermind. Figured it out. jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ -
Re: testing procmail
I realize this is a mutt list, not a procmail list, but this is just a quick question not worth subscribing to another list for: Here's my test .procmailrc Problem is, nothing sent from me is ending up in chat. it all goes to the default directory. In .muttrc, i have: mailboxes ~/mail ~/mail/chat jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ - MAILDIR=/usr/home/jcm/mail LOGFILE=/usr/home/jcm/procmail.log :0 * ^From:.*jcm $MAILDIR/chat # Fall back to the default mailbox.
Re: testing procmail
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 05:32:50PM +, J McKitrick wrote: :I realize this is a mutt list, not a procmail list, :but this is just a quick question not worth subscribing to another :list for: : :Here's my test .procmailrc : :Problem is, nothing sent from me is ending up in chat. it all goes to :the default directory. To your .procmailrc, add this line to enable extended diagnostics: VERBOSE=on Then send another test email, and check your LOGFILE to see what Procmail is doing. The recipe looks fine, so I'm guessing that Procmail isn't even running. In which case you need to fix your $HOME/.forward file, if your local MTA (Sendmail, qmail, etc.) isn't configured to call Procmail automatically. -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: testing procmail
Enable verbose logging in procmail. And remember that you need a local lockfile for file deliveries. This is really off-topic here. A searchable procmail mailing list archive is at http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/ J McKitrick writes: Well, i took your advice, and according to the test, this should work. I tried the most basic possible procmail filter: I'm trying to match subjects with 'test' in them. But every time i send myself such a message, it disappears into oblivion. The procmail rule sends it to 'chat', which is a mailbox ~/mail/chat But it never shows up in chat. No thing returns from the mailing, no errors. It just disappears. jm -- - Jonathon McKitrick / [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ "I prefer the term Artificial Person myself."/ - -- "We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!" -- Vroomfondel
