Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-26 Thread J.D. Falk
On Apr 25, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Jeff Mitchell wrote:

 If you trust the issued certificates(!) being used to sign the mail, you at 
 least have a good indication that the spam is coming from the domain that it 
 says it's coming from. This can make spam blocking much more effective 
 because instead of simply hoping that a domain-based blocklist will block 
 spam and not ham (due to spoofed sender addresses), you have a pretty good 
 feeling that this will be the case.
 
 Of course this relies on various other bits and pieces to fall into place, 
 such as properly handling such messages (Gmail's detection and handling rules 
 aren't public AFAIK), CAs not being compromised, etc. Not to mention that the 
 spammers can simply register another domain and buy a new cert -- but then 
 the argument above still holds.

DKIM doesn't use purchased certificates.  It's all self-signed.

As for catching spammers, using d= as an identifier is more effective at 
finding the good stuff than the bad stuff.  So if this list were signed by 
nanog.org, we (or our reputation systems) could all recognize that mail signed 
d=nanog.org rarely resulted in user complaints, and thus it must be mail the 
users want to receive; conversely, mail which spoofs nanog.org but is not 
signed can safely* be stored in the big bit bucket in the cloud.

--
J.D. Falk
the leading purveyor of industry counter-rhetoric solutions

* assuming nanog.org signs ALL mail -- but that's another long discussion


Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-26 Thread Michael Thomas

On 04/26/2011 05:08 PM, J.D. Falk wrote:

On Apr 25, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Jeff Mitchell wrote:

   

If you trust the issued certificates(!) being used to sign the mail, you at 
least have a good indication that the spam is coming from the domain that it 
says it's coming from. This can make spam blocking much more effective because 
instead of simply hoping that a domain-based blocklist will block spam and not 
ham (due to spoofed sender addresses), you have a pretty good feeling that this 
will be the case.

Of course this relies on various other bits and pieces to fall into place, such 
as properly handling such messages (Gmail's detection and handling rules aren't 
public AFAIK), CAs not being compromised, etc. Not to mention that the spammers 
can simply register another domain and buy a new cert -- but then the argument 
above still holds.
 

DKIM doesn't use purchased certificates.  It's all self-signed.
   


Well, they aren't self-signed either; DKIM doesn't use x.509
style certs at all. It's just RSAPublicKey DER-encoded public
keys that are placed in the DNS.

Mike, but it still requires some crufty ASN.1 which is prolly the
  confusion



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-25 Thread Jeff Mitchell

On 04/22/2011 07:24 PM, Lynda wrote:

Non existent, it's SPF only.


My point.


Nearly all of the spam I see is DKIM signed. It just makes messages
bigger. I'd just as soon our volunteers spend their times on other
things, myself.


DKIM isn't designed explicitly to stop spam, it's designed to identify 
senders.


If you trust the issued certificates(!) being used to sign the mail, you 
at least have a good indication that the spam is coming from the domain 
that it says it's coming from. This can make spam blocking much more 
effective because instead of simply hoping that a domain-based blocklist 
will block spam and not ham (due to spoofed sender addresses), you have 
a pretty good feeling that this will be the case.


Of course this relies on various other bits and pieces to fall into 
place, such as properly handling such messages (Gmail's detection and 
handling rules aren't public AFAIK), CAs not being compromised, etc. Not 
to mention that the spammers can simply register another domain and buy 
a new cert -- but then the argument above still holds.


--Jeff



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-25 Thread Dave CROCKER



On 4/22/2011 4:24 PM, Lynda wrote:

Nearly all of the spam I see is DKIM signed. It just makes messages bigger.
I'd just as soon our volunteers spend their times on other things, myself.



In the off-chance you are assuming that the presence of a DKIM signature is
supposed to mean something about the quality of a message, please note that it
isn't.  It is only meant to supply a reliable, valid identifier, with which
assessments can then be made.  That assessment step is where the fun happens.

See:

   http://dkim.org/specs/draft-ietf-dkim-deployment-11.html

For reference, spammers are typically early adopters of newly security
standardized mechanisms, in the (demonstrably valid) belief that some folk
confuse identification with quality assurance.

In particular, the DKIM d= identifier is primarily helpful for avoiding false
positives.  That is, it is for an assessment process targeting signers you
trust, rather more than for targeting those you don't. If you don't care about
the trust side of the filtering equation, I suspect DKIM will not be all that
helpful for you.

d/
--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-23 Thread Franck Martin


On 4/23/11 11:24 , Lynda shr...@deaddrop.org wrote:

On 4/22/2011 4:01 PM, Franck Martin wrote:

 On 4/23/11 10:41 , Alex Brooksaskoorb+na...@gmail.com  wrote:

 On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Franck Martinfmar...@linkedin.com
 wrote:
 What is the DKIM check result for those messages?

 Non existent, it's SPF only.

 My point.

Nearly all of the spam I see is DKIM signed. It just makes messages
bigger. I'd just as soon our volunteers spend their times on other
things, myself.

It is like IPv6, it just makes packets bigger...




Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-22 Thread Franck Martin
What is the DKIM check result for those messages?

May be time to get nanog mailing list DKIM aware?

On 4/22/11 13:24 , Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote:

I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?

Thanks,




Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-22 Thread Alex Brooks
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Franck Martin fmar...@linkedin.com wrote:
 What is the DKIM check result for those messages?

Non existent, it's SPF only.

This is what GMail sees:

Received: from s0.nanog.org (s0.nanog.org [207.75.116.162])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h1si7255610ibn.43.2011.04.22.13.42.53
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of
nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org designates
207.75.116.162 as permitted sender) client-ip=207.75.116.162;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best
guess record for domain of
nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org designates
207.75.116.162 as permitted sender)
smtp.mail=nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org


 May be time to get nanog mailing list DKIM aware?

 On 4/22/11 13:24 , Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote:

I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?

Yes,  for example, the message I'm replying to had this at the top of it:

Due to a filter you created, this message was not sent to Spam. Edit Filters
Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be. Beware of
following any links in it or of providing the sender with any personal
information.  Learn more

So GMail thinks it's a phishing message :-/

Quite a lot of my Nanog messages are marked as spam, which is why I
created a filter to not send any messages with a list ID header with
nanog.nanog.org in it to spam at all.

The only way for Nanog to get round this would be for the mail
administrator to follow *every* step at
https://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=81126  which
basically is:
- Explicit SPF with hard fail.
- Signing with DKIM or DomainKeys.
- Useing a consistent IP address to send bulk mail.
- Keeping valid reverse DNS records for the IP address(es) from which
mail is sent, pointing to the sending domain.
- Use the same address in the 'From:' header on every bulk mail that is sent.
- Using the Precedence: bulk header.
- Up-to-date contact information in the WHOIS record, and on abuse.net.

But the list administrator would have to do all of that faff.

Alex



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-22 Thread Franck Martin

On 4/23/11 10:41 , Alex Brooks askoorb+na...@gmail.com wrote:

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Franck Martin fmar...@linkedin.com
wrote:
 What is the DKIM check result for those messages?

Non existent, it's SPF only.

My point.


This is what GMail sees:

Received: from s0.nanog.org (s0.nanog.org [207.75.116.162])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
h1si7255610ibn.43.2011.04.22.13.42.53
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of
nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org designates
207.75.116.162 as permitted sender) client-ip=207.75.116.162;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best
guess record for domain of
nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org designates
207.75.116.162 as permitted sender)
smtp.mail=nanog-bounces+askoorb+nanog=gmail@nanog.org


 May be time to get nanog mailing list DKIM aware?

 On 4/22/11 13:24 , Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote:

I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to
why?

Yes,  for example, the message I'm replying to had this at the top of it:

Due to a filter you created, this message was not sent to Spam. Edit
Filters
Warning: This message may not be from whom it claims to be. Beware of
following any links in it or of providing the sender with any personal
information.  Learn more

So GMail thinks it's a phishing message :-/

Because from: may be from a domain which is known to DKIM sign
everything (like gmail).


Quite a lot of my Nanog messages are marked as spam, which is why I
created a filter to not send any messages with a list ID header with
nanog.nanog.org in it to spam at all.

The only way for Nanog to get round this would be for the mail
administrator to follow *every* step at
https://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=81126  which
basically is:
- Explicit SPF with hard fail.
- Signing with DKIM or DomainKeys.
- Useing a consistent IP address to send bulk mail.
- Keeping valid reverse DNS records for the IP address(es) from which
mail is sent, pointing to the sending domain.
- Use the same address in the 'From:' header on every bulk mail that is
sent.
- Using the Precedence: bulk header.
- Up-to-date contact information in the WHOIS record, and on abuse.net.

But the list administrator would have to do all of that faff.

No, it is mailman, just upgrade mailman. Recent versions are more DKIM
aware...

More info: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-06




Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-22 Thread Lynda

On 4/22/2011 4:01 PM, Franck Martin wrote:


On 4/23/11 10:41 , Alex Brooksaskoorb+na...@gmail.com  wrote:


On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Franck Martinfmar...@linkedin.com
wrote:

What is the DKIM check result for those messages?


Non existent, it's SPF only.


My point.


Nearly all of the spam I see is DKIM signed. It just makes messages 
bigger. I'd just as soon our volunteers spend their times on other 
things, myself.


--
The person becomes vulnerable to all manner of fads, such as
astrology, superstitions, economics, and tarot-card reading.

   The Black Swan, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-22 Thread William Allen Simpson

On 4/21/11 9:24 PM, Bill Blackford wrote:

I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?


I've read the thread, and ironically all messages from Franck Martin in
this thread were sent to spam by gmail.  None of the others!  This is
like an earlier thread:


 Previous Message 
Subject: Re: sudden low spam levels?
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 10:10:24 -0500
From: William Allen Simpson william.allen.simp...@gmail.com
To: nanog@nanog.org

On 1/3/11 6:42 PM, Jay Farrell wrote:
 I noticed a substantial drop in spam in my gmail account in recent days,
 from several hundred a day to maybe a hundred. Ironically, gmail filtered
 this thread to my spam folder.

Yes, I found these messages my gmail spam today, too.  Lately, gmail has
been regularly flagging NANOG as spam, particularly the end of week
CIDR and BGP reports.



gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-21 Thread Bill Blackford
I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?

Thanks,

-b

-- 
Bill Blackford
Network Engineer

Logged into reality and abusing my sudo privileges.



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-21 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote:
 I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
 messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

 Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?

sometimes nanog mail gets marked as spam for me ... I think spam does
not get auto-forwarded.



Re: gmail dropping mesages

2011-04-21 Thread Bill Blackford
ok, there are some in the spam folder. Hmm, didn't think to look there
for the missing ones when my inbox appears to be receivng partial
threads.

Thanks,

-b

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Bill Blackford bblackf...@gmail.com wrote:
 I've recently observed gmail dropping messages or not forwarding all
 messages/posts  from the nanog list. This is rather annoying.

 Has anyone else experienced this? Does anyone have any insight as to why?

 sometimes nanog mail gets marked as spam for me ... I think spam does
 not get auto-forwarded.




-- 
Bill Blackford
Network Engineer

Logged into reality and abusing my sudo privileges.