Hello,
just got an information from MxToolbox that my IP (actually not my IP in
particular, but the ASN it belongs to) has been blacklisted at UCEPROTECT
level 3. Checking of my IP (217.182.79.147) at
http://www.uceprotect.net/en/rblcheck.php gives the info that it has been
listed because there wer
Am 20.01.21 um 10:40 schrieb Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop:
> Hello,
> just got an information from MxToolbox that my IP (actually not my IP in
> particular, but the ASN it belongs to) has been blacklisted at UCEPROTECT
> level 3. Checking of my IP (217.182.79.147) at
> http://www.uceprotect.net/en/rblc
On 1/20/21 11:10 AM, Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop wrote:
Am 20.01.21 um 10:40 schrieb Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop:
Hello,
just got an information from MxToolbox that my IP (actually not my IP in
particular, but the ASN it belongs to) has been blacklisted at UCEPROTECT
level 3. Checking of my IP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 11:21 +0100, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
>
> I agree with what you said. That said, those who use UCEPROTECT above
> level 1 to unconditionally block mails deserve to lose mails.
>
For me, it's "appreciate never seeing t
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 11:54, Jim Popovitch via mailop
wrote:
> For me, it's "appreciate never seeing those emails". I outright block
> level 2 and level 3, and high score level 1. I've been doing that for
> years now and have never seen a reject log message that wasn't already
> listed in Zen,
We were dealing with UCEPROTECT blocks roughly one year ago where we had
several IP's blacklisted in level 1. Based on the info they gave, it
wasn't always that easy to pinpoint the cause of the block, since they
provided a date and time and wrote "+/- 1 minute". Several times, i
checked our lo
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
I also find it quite impudent that the people who run UCEPROTECT offer
the whitelisting option (ips.whitelisted.org), but request payment for it...
If you provide access to blacklist for free, you should whitelist for free
as well.
By that l
On 20/01/2021 11:36, Martin Flygenring via mailop wrote:
As mentioned by Hans-Martin, you can pay them to be whitelisted, which
means that you will no longer appear in level 2 or 3 according to
http://www.whitelisted.org/. So if you have sent so much bad mail you
end up in their level 2 or 3,
s, UCEPROTECT taking whitelisting fees from users of
> cheap providers that cut their costs by not paying
> > an abuse team or by making a profit from spammer hosting looks not so
> unreasonable after all. I do not condone their
> > practice, though. On the mail systems that I
Hi all,
I'm looking for brainstorming and updated industry "standards" from people
handling outgoing SMTP services or ESP exporting APIs to "request
subscriptions" (confirmed opt-in).
Not every website uses CAPTCHA and also webforms using CAPTCHA are being
abused as even reCAPTCHA have been crack
UCEPROTECT just recently changed their listing criteria for level 3
listings (blacklisting an entire ASN).
Direct source: http://www.uceprotect.net/en/index.php?m=12&s=0
What they don't make clear (for whatever reason) is the actual change.
Previously if 0.2% of a provider's IPs were blacklisted,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 13:29 +0100, Hetzner Blacklist via mailop wrote:
>
> New/current policy: http://www.uceprotect.net/en/index.php?m=3&s=5
>
You failed to mention this bit from that link:
"UCEPROTECT-Level 3 lists all IP's within an ASN excep
Dnia 20.01.2021 o godz. 11:50:30 Stefano Bagnara via mailop pisze:
>
> How do you deal with this issue?
I'm not an ESP and actually don't face this issue, but some time ago I
created my own version of CAPTCHA that I use in registration form on my
server.
There is no CAPTCHA on the form per se, b
Dnia 20.01.2021 o godz. 14:00:47 Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop pisze:
>
> I'm not sure about what actual level of protection it provides. What do you
> think?
Sorry, I just realized that you were looking for a way of protection against
mail-bombing caused by subscription confirmation emails, and not p
On 1/20/21 1:58 PM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 13:29 +0100, Hetzner Blacklist via mailop wrote:
New/current policy: http://www.uceprotect.net/en/index.php?m=3&s=5
You failed to mention this bit from that link:
"UCEPROTECT-Level 3 lists all IP's within an ASN e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 14:10 +0100, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
>
> On 1/20/21 1:58 PM, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 13:29 +0100, Hetzner Blacklist via mailop wrote:
> >
> > > New/current policy: http://www.uceprotec
> Il 20/01/2021 13:29 Hetzner Blacklist via mailop ha
> scritto:
>
> Looking back on my infrequent checking of UCEPROTECT, that means OVH
> will probably be permanently on level 3.
>
> In fact, a number of other large, well-known providers are now listed on
> level 3 as well.
I host my person
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:45 AM Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop
wrote:
>
> Hello,
> just got an information from MxToolbox that my IP (actually not my IP in
> particular, but the ASN it belongs to) has been blacklisted at UCEPROTECT
> level 3. Checking of my IP (217.182.79.147) at
> http://www.uceprotect
On 2021-01-20 05:10, Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop wrote:
On one hand, UCEPROTECT is relatively aggressive, and their unlisting policy is
at least questionable. However, running
a blacklist incurs costs in terms of server time and admin time, so if they
provide access for free, how should they
On 2021-01-20 5:39 a.m., Vittorio Bertola via mailop wrote:
I could understand listing specific providers if they were clearly and openly
tolerant of spammers, but listing big chunks of the entire industry at once?
Personally, I think this is the year that you can expect to see more of
that,
I don't really understand why anybody would use UCEPROTECT3 anyway.
The first sentence of their web page says:
"This blacklist has been created for HARDLINERS. It can, and probably will
cause collateral damage to innocent users when used to block email."
http://www.uceprotect.net/en/index.php?m=
My question is: how widely is this BL (UCEPROTECT level 3) used? Do I have
to worry about deliverability? Their page tells me to ask my provider to fix
the issue, which I will do, but... it's OVH, so you know...
UCEPROTECT is among the worst blacklists in usefulness. They have a low
catch ra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 08:27 -0800, Russell Clemings via mailop wrote:
> I don't really understand why anybody would use UCEPROTECT3 anyway.
>
> The first sentence of their web page says:
>
> "This blacklist has been created for HARDLINERS. It can,
On 20/01/2021 10:50, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
> I'm looking for brainstorming and updated industry "standards" from people
> handling outgoing SMTP services or ESP exporting APIs to "request
> subscriptions" (confirmed opt-in).
How about a web-based process to confirm opt-in?
Domains cou
On 20 Jan 2021, at 11:27, Russell Clemings via mailop wrote:
I don't really understand why anybody would use UCEPROTECT3 anyway.
The first sentence of their web page says:
"This blacklist has been created for HARDLINERS. It can, and probably
will
cause collateral damage to innocent users whe
25 matches
Mail list logo
