So leaving aside the discussion of specific TLS solutions, how do we get
the list admin on the line to fix this?
On 10/25/18 8:50 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
Y'all might want to be aware that this issue is being discussed on the
NANOG list. In the age of Let's Encrypt expired TLS certs are a reall
On 30/10/2018 09:29, Noel Butler wrote:
> On 30/10/2018 03:18, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2018, at 12:41, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
>
> N.B. please don't CC me, I'm subscribed to the list.
> I normally wouldn't, but your posts all have this header:
>
> Reply-To: Jim Popovitch
>
> Per
On 30/10/2018 03:18, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2018, at 12:41, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
>
>> N.B. please don't CC me, I'm subscribed to the list.
>
> I normally wouldn't, but your posts all have this header:
>
> Reply-To: Jim Popovitch
>
> Perhaps that's being added by Mailman for s
On 29/10/2018 19:44, Frands Bjerring Hansen wrote:
> Noel,
>
> LE does not insist on certbot. They recommend it, and why wouldn't they? :)
>
> Use acme.sh instead if you are not able adhere to the requirements of
> Certbot. Acme.sh requires nothing but sh.
>
> Also, it seems like you did not
Please contact me offlist.
Thanks!
-lem
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Might be a reason for it.
Perhaps you should ask…?
https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=614866&clcid
Won’t be commenting any further on this thread … or offlist.
Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise
Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
"Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
Got
While we do see an increase in AUTH attacks from Amazon AWS, it is still
a drop in the bucket compared to traditional attack sources. And there
is not enough evidence yet to see if this is actual hacker's with their
own resources, vs simply hacker's who have compromised someone else's
resource
On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 13:18 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2018, at 12:41, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
>
> > N.B. please don't CC me, I'm subscribed to the list.
>
> I normally wouldn't, but your posts all have this header:
>
> Reply-To: Jim Popovitch
>
> Perhaps that's being added
Hi,
anyone else in trouble with hotmail.com again?
We are a very low sending MX without any spam from our range. It started at
17:00 that hotmail was not offering TLS. I have no clue, why this is the case.
Is this some kind of spam defense voodoo?
Our MX tried again after an hour and got
On 29 Oct 2018, at 12:41, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> N.B. please don't CC me, I'm subscribed to the list.
I normally wouldn't, but your posts all have this header:
Reply-To: Jim Popovitch
Perhaps that's being added by Mailman for some reason...
__
On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 12:32 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2018, at 10:40, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
>
> > You allow nsupdate from your cgi/php/java enabled webserver(s)?
>
> My **what?*** Are you high? Do you mean to be insulting???
Of course not. I only asked a simple question. Yo
On 29 Oct 2018, at 10:40, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
You allow nsupdate from your cgi/php/java enabled webserver(s)?
My **what?*** Are you high? Do you mean to be insulting???
But no, I don't run anything on my webserver that modifies its own DNS.
Although I would be vulnerable in theor
On 10/29/2018 11:48 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 11:31 -0400, Dave Brockman wrote:
>> On 10/29/2018 10:40 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
>>> You allow nsupdate from your cgi/php/java enabled webserver(s)?
>>>
>>> -Jim P.
>>
>> No, the whole point of using acme.
On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 11:31 -0400, Dave Brockman wrote:
> On 10/29/2018 10:40 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> > You allow nsupdate from your cgi/php/java enabled webserver(s)?
> >
> > -Jim P.
>
> No, the whole point of using acme.sh and the nsupdate module is to
> avoid running a web serv
On 10/29/2018 10:40 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> You allow nsupdate from your cgi/php/java enabled webserver(s)?
>
> -Jim P.
No, the whole point of using acme.sh and the nsupdate module is to avoid
running a web server. You can also run LE with a webserver that doesn't
support cgi, ph
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 09:52 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> On 29 Oct 2018, at 5:44, Frands Bjerring Hansen wrote:
>
> > Noel,
> >
> > LE does not insist on certbot. They recommend it, and why wouldn't
> > they? :)
> >
> > Use acme.sh instead if you
On 29 Oct 2018, at 5:44, Frands Bjerring Hansen wrote:
Noel,
LE does not insist on certbot. They recommend it, and why wouldn't
they? :)
Use acme.sh instead if you are not able adhere to the requirements of
Certbot. Acme.sh requires nothing but sh.
Also, it seems like you did not proper
Hi Benoît,
>> How about blocking the Amazon AWS IP ranges? Are there any legitimate
>> emails being send by them?
We see less than 1 clean between 1 million (or 1 billion?) emails from there,
so guess what :-)
Our fast reacting abuse desk whitelists single IPs on demand from those ranges.
Olaf
Hi List
We increasingly notice, that when an account got phished, it is being
abused to send spam from usually one or two Amazon AWS US IP Addresses
simultaneously, staying below our account auto-block thereshold.
Quite some time in the past, when I first observed this, contacted the
Amazon Abuse
Noel,
LE does not insist on certbot. They recommend it, and why wouldn't they? :)
Use acme.sh instead if you are not able adhere to the requirements of Certbot.
Acme.sh requires nothing but sh.
Also, it seems like you did not properly read about ways to address the
problems you mention. Inst
20 matches
Mail list logo
