On Sat, 16 Mar 2024, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
Depending on the kind of changes which have been applied to the
message you can reverse the transformations and verify the original
DKIM signatures. A member of this list developed a software to do
this programmatically.
Where can I learn
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 18:40:16 +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop
wrote:
>Are there any other checks or measures I can do?
What exactly is the Zen result code? There are many reasons for such
listings.
mdr
--
"There are no laws here, only agreements."
--
Hello,
last few days we've had 2 diferent IP addresses listed in SpamHaus ZEN
1. monitoring server which rarely sends e-mail
- to single address in our internal network
- single address of our customer (outside our network)
- got listed after 4 e-mails within one day.
2. nextcloud server which
On 3/21/24 5:47 AM, Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote:
Mailing lists modify messages in a de-facto standard way. It is
possible to automatically undo such changes and verify the original
signature, if it is left intact.
I feel like this is a "can vs should" type problem. There are a LOT of
On 3/21/2024 3:47 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Mailing lists modify messages in a de-facto standard way.
actually, they don't. or rather, there is more than one de-facto set of
modifications and therefore efforts to reverse the modifications is in
the realm of heuristics, which means
Afternoon,
Any Talktalk / Tiscali admins about or recommendations for
contacting? We're seeing lots of deferred, ( TT991 ) messages when trying to
deliver email. ~50% goes straight through and the other 50% is taking 12-24
hours to be delivered.
Cheers,
On 3/21/2024 5:48 AM, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
The topic about onmicrosoft.com has already been brought up multiple times on
this list, the last time in
January:https://list.mailop.org/private/mailop/2024-January/026871.html
ff
To sum it up: .onmicrosoft.com is the default domain
On Sun 17/Mar/2024 14:02:23 +0100 Dave Crocker wrote:
On 3/16/2024 1:31 PM, Slavko via mailop wrote:
And the same RCF clearly suggests to leave other (even invalid)
signatures untouched.
Which text in RFC 6376 says that?
Perhaps you are thinking of Section 6.1 which includes:
INFORMATIVE
On 21.03.2024 at 00:46 Robert Giles via mailop wrote:
> Seeing this type of stuff quite a lot originating from legitimate Microsoft
> infrastructure, and their abuse desk never seems to take any action; I
> suppose dropping any *.onmicrosoft.com envelope-from is probably the right
> course of
