David, may we share this with our Cox contact?
Anne
> On Jan 10, 2019, at 3:46 PM, David Carriger
> wrote:
>
> If we have anyone from Cox on the list, I was doing some SPF lookups against
> large mail providers and stumbled across this...
>
> "v=spf1 include:%{d}.7b.spf-protect.agari.com
If we have anyone from Cox on the list, I was doing some SPF lookups against
large mail providers and stumbled across this...
"v=spf1 include:%{d}.7b.spf-protect.agari.com
exists:%{i}._i.%{d}._d.espf.agari.com -all",
"v=spf1 ip4:24.248.74.254 ip4:98.178.246.9 ip4:98.178.246.69
include
Hello, Anne,
I appreciate you giving us some details to start with, thank you. We've
investigated and found the source. We've restarted conversations internally
about sending explicit, permission-based mail that complies with the same
anti-spam policy to which we hold our customers.
You'll receiv
As most of you know, we produce email servers and spam protection
products, but we have been expanding our security and threat detection
products, but is is amazing the increase lately in email authentication
attacks... We all know about the number of compromised IoT devices on
the Internet, b
On 1/10/19 10:42 AM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
Campaign Monitor is now spamming on their own behalf..and our original abuse
contact there is unresponsive - in fact abuse@ is unresponsive..maybe
gone...anybody have any reason why anything coming from Campaign Monitor's
space shouldn't be re
Hello, Carissa,
Generally we are used to dealing with an individual - upon receipt of the first
spam from your Faye Nagpigkit to a role account (!), on January 8, I wrote to
your abuse@ asking for Heather to contact me (this is how we have always worked
with you guys in in the past). I never he
Hi Anne,
Carissa from Campaign Monitor's deliverability team here. I can confirm
that our abuse team is very responsive and abuse@ is still the best way to
reach them. I didn't see any details about or samples of spam in your
previous email to abuse@, would you mind sending those through, please?
Campaign Monitor is now spamming on their own behalf..and our original abuse
contact there is unresponsive - in fact abuse@ is unresponsive..maybe
gone...anybody have any reason why anything coming from Campaign Monitor's
space shouldn't be rejected on sight?
Anne
Anne P. Mitchell,
Attorney a
Rob, Jim ...
None of this is particularly related to mail ops.
Cheers,
Steve
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
On 1/10/2019 12:00 PM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> At the very least, it is a suspicious practice. And certain people
> high up in the industry have strongly warned me against ever doing
> ANYTHING like that
Clearly that is a stated "dislike" of an entity's practice.
Your PREVI
On Thu, 2019-01-10 at 11:37 -0500, Rob McEwen wrote:
> On 1/10/2019 10:44 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> > you are de-valuing mine,
>
> Actually, your opinion about these organizations was important and
> noteworthy. if someone has a conflict of interest, it *is* helpful to
> get feedback
> On 10 Jan 2019, at 16:42, Chris Boyd wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 10, 2019, at 3:53 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>>
>> mcimail.com (30 Jun 2003 )
>
> I used to have an mcimail.com address, and an @internetmci.com address.
>
> Anyone know if that’s still in use?
mcimail.com was turned into spam
> On Jan 10, 2019, at 3:53 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>
> mcimail.com (30 Jun 2003 )
I used to have an mcimail.com address, and an @internetmci.com address.
Anyone know if that’s still in use?
—Chris
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https
On 1/10/2019 10:44 AM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
you are de-valuing mine,
Actually, your opinion about these organizations was important and
noteworthy. if someone has a conflict of interest, it *is* helpful to
get feedback indicating that such an entity is reported to be operating
et
On Thu, 2019-01-10 at 09:33 -0500, Rob McEwen wrote:
> ... [snip] ...
>
> So I'll stop here and quit before I put my foot in my mouth!
But ya didn't, did ya?
Look dude, everybody has opinions. You are de-valuing mine, strictly
because I have a biz agreement with some entity you dislike. Pffft.
On 1/10/2019 9:33 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
is basically to say, "but how do you know for sure that the person
isn't giving in to competing interests or is compromised? and how dare
you question their judgment!" (to summarize your arguments)
oops - "double negative" typo - I meant to say:
is bas
On 1/8/2019 5:16 PM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
I also see an issue where you probably shouldn't criticize
another DNSBL unless you have data that they are misstating why and how
they collect fees for their efforts
Jim,
My focus was always on "best practices" and principles - and I think
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:List_of_major_email_domains_no_longer_in_service
--
Benjamin
-Original Message-
From: mailop On Behalf Of Benjamin BILLON
Sent: mercredi 9 janvier 2019 18:15
To: mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?
I didn't find
18 matches
Mail list logo
