On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, at 08:32, Lichtinger, Bernhard via mailop wrote:
The IP addresses for "fonts.googleapis.com" are: 142.250.217.106
2607:f8b0:400a:800::200a
The IPs of "fonts.googleapis.com" got listed on SBL because these
IPs are also used to serve "firebasestorage.googleapis.com". Last
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024, at 15:24, John Levine via mailop wrote:
On January 25 I was alerted to false positives due to Spamhaus SBL
listing IP addresses of fonts.googleapis.com.
Are those IPs supposed to send mail? If not, why would an SBL
listing, even a mistaken one, matter?
Thanks, that's t
Hi mailops,
Thought some might be interested, though those affected sure already
know:
On January 25 I was alerted to false positives due to Spamhaus SBL
listing IP addresses of fonts.googleapis.com. According to our spam
filter stats this, as expected, did not last long. But it seems to
h
On Tue, 23 May 2023, at 16:10, Jim Popovitch via mailop wrote:
Lots of good responses for alternatives to verifier.port25.com, but
do any of them support aliased feedback address whereby you could
send an email to check-auth-lhs=domain@verifier.port25.com and
the response would be returned
On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, at 13:45, Tom Wong-Cornall via mailop wrote:
On Fri, Sep 3 '21 at 10.02 NZST, Mark Fletcher via mailop
wrote:
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 2:31 PM Ken Johnson via mailop
wrote:
The kind of answer I was expecting was along the lines of "Obviously your
data has been mis-interp
On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, at 13:50, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
In my case, the address to receive DMARC reports is exempt from
greylisting, so this could not be the reason. My server is also not
too busy, so it's quite improbable that they get a 4xx reply due to
queueing.
+1
I'd be surprise
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021, at 13:52, Tom Bartel wrote:
Issues should be resolved, please let me know otherwise.
Last error I got for 2.0.0.127.bl.score.senderscore.com was
yesterday around 17:30 UTC. All good since then.
Thanks!
--
-- Andreas
:-)
_
Did I miss something? Since days .bl.score.senderscore.com returns
NXDOMAIN or SERVFAIL, and apparently I am not the only one affected.
--
-- Andreas
:-)
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
The wonderful domain name b-home.at is not my own but I am its
postmaster. All mail from b-home.at sent to chello.at and inode.at
is rejected by mxin?.upcmail.net with e.g.
550 5.1.0 MXIN405 sending mailbox postmas...@b-home.at unknown
11 years ago [sic] b-home.at was hosted at inode.at (whi
Could someone provide the old but apparently still valid IP addresses
so that we can configure DNS forwarding locally instead of disabling
the DNSBL?
--
-- Andreas
:-)
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021, at 20:22, Michael Wise via mailop wrote:
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, at 23:43, Hans-Martin Mosner wrote:
Today we got a response to our abuse reports requesting that we
report these to j...@office365.microsoft.com
Why would you have thought reporting an Azure item to the Office365
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020, at 09:51, Andy Smith via mailop wrote:
Since yesterday I've been seeing a large number of attempted
subscriptions to all the public lists on one of my Mailman servers.
(...)
I can confirm this for my servers from top to end including some of
the hashes.
BTW, Mailman m
which doesn't offer MTA-STA at all.)
-Original Message-
From: mailop On Behalf Of Andreas Schamanek via
mailop
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 1:17 PM
To: mailop
Subject: [mailop] mta-sts.outlook.com Internal server error
In case someone cares:
$ curl -sD- -o/dev/null
htt
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020, at 19:21, John Levine via mailop wrote:
In article ,
Philip Paeps via mailop wrote:
On 2020-02-07 08:34:13 (-0800), Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
It would be best if autoresponders simply didn't reply to messages
from mailing lists.
That windmill is not going to budge no
In case someone cares:
$ curl -sD- -o/dev/null https://mta-sts.hotmail.com/.well-known/mta-sts.txt |
grep ^HTTP
HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error
Same for hotmail.com. Started seeing this in the night between January
6 and 7.
--
-- Andreas
:-)
__
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019, at 09:50, Maarten Oelering via mailop wrote:
we were wondering if there's still a good reason for adding plain
text to a html message. Is there a significant audience reading in
plain text? Is plain text important for accessibility?
As others have said "significant" is si
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019, at 19:17, Michael Wise via mailop wrote:
We certainly don’t care….
You got a weird sense of humor ;)
$ perl -MEmail::MIME -e 'print
Email::MIME->new(join("",<>))->debug_structure' michael.eml
+ multipart/mixed;
boundary="_000_DM5PR00MB0267E9CF6178ED6925F03AAF80650DM5P
notification.skype.com does not resolve. When I saw it some days ago I
thought it was an oversight that Microsoft's gonna fix instantly, but
I was mistaken:
Oct 12 01:14:09 iac postfix/smtpd[13338]: connect from
db3gmehub01.msn.com[94.245.112.10]
Oct 12 01:14:09 iac postfix/smtpd[13338]: Ano
On Sat, 4 May 2019, at 11:44, Vytis Marciulionis via mailop wrote:
DNS Error: 6443565 DNS type 'mx' lookup of example.com responded with
code NXDOMAIN Domain name not found: example.com
Has anything changed and now we can consider "no MX record" a valid reason
to not deliver messages to that d
On Fri, 3 May 2019, at 20:13, Marc Bradshaw via mailop wrote:
What's odd here is that 2603:1036:301:2171::5 is allocated to
Microsoft itself.
Maybe they still haven't fixed this hole?
Microsoft: Hackers compromised support agent’s credentials to access
customer email accounts | TechCrunc
IMHO, someone might like to add some DNS:
Apr 3 19:28:06 NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
p69.mailgun.us[184.173.105.69]: 450 4.1.8
: Sender address rejected:
Domain not found;
from=
to= proto=ESMTP helo=
Last seen 2019-04-04 03:30 UTC.
--
-- Andreas
:-)
__
On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, at 10:40, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
To make a real example here is the record for the
"emailmarketingblog.it" domain:
"v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc##vox.it!10m;
ruf=mailto:dmarc##vox.it; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400;"
(replace ## with @mail )
And here the author
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, at 12:44, Chris Adams wrote:
I was looking at some stats on a mail server cluster I operate to
handle a handful of small telephone companies, and I noticed that I
get almost no viruses blocked anymore. It's a fairly typical setup
of postfix and amavisd (calling spamassas
On Fri, 27 Oct 2017, at 20:10, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> Is there someone from Yahoo! who can provide some insight into why
> there is always 1 SPF lookup failure in your DMARC reports.
I am pretty sure I have observed the very same issue. However, my
volume is lower than yours, and all reports th
On Fri, 19 May 2017, at 14:56, John Levine wrote:
> In article <002401d2d07c$de401730$9ac04590$@iname.com> you write:
> >notified domain holders who were sending legitimate email from bad
> >IPs (...)
> >Most well-known cuplprit is Travelocity and their flight change
> >notifications. Too bad t
On Tue, 16 May 2017, at 13:05, Vick Khera wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 12:11 PM, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
>
> > Heck, we may not even need to do it. Enough coverage and the threat may
> > get a bunch of them fixed anyway.
>
> hahahaha. you are very optimistic.
Maybe, but I still love the idea o
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017, at 15:51, Rob Kendrick wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 03:42:53PM -, John Levine wrote:
> > In article <20170204100707.z5qygog6vzs5d...@ikki.ethgen.ch> you write:
> > >I have a private mail server in hetzner network (5.9.7.51). ...
> >
> > Considering how much spam gushe
Does anyone know what is down with lists.opendkim.org? I cannot reach
it, however http://lists.elandsys.com seems to work fine except that
all links point to lists.opendkim.org.
--
-- Andreas
:-?
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https
On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, at 10:39, Robert Guthrie wrote:
> I recently setup a new SMTP on a new IP address, emails to Google
> Apps accounts take a few hours to arrive do to throttling on
> Google's end. ... After about a week I'm still seeing 1 hour delays
> on things like password reset emails.
An update on my message asking for advice ...
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, at 20:09, Andreas Schamanek wrote:
> Since more than 2 weeks my IP 188.40.39.209 is blocked by Microsoft
> (e.g. (host mx3.hotmail.com [65.55.37.104] said: 550 SC-001 ...
As some of you suggested I contacted Hotmail s
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, at 18:51, Michael Wise wrote:
> Did you actually speak to a human?
Yes, a total of 4.
> I'd suggest asking them to escalate.
I didn't use the word "escalate" but I did ask "how to proceed".
Haven't heard from the support folks since then.
Escalate to who/where?
I wonder w
Fellow mailops,
I could need some advice and review: Since more than 2 weeks my IP
188.40.39.209 is blocked by Microsoft (e.g. (host mx3.hotmail.com
[65.55.37.104] said: 550 SC-001 (COL004-MC3F7) Unfortunately, messages
from 188.40.39.209 weren't sent. Please contact your Internet service
pro
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, at 16:41, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
> Our intrusion detection system gets the password hash as part of the
> check, so we can ignore failure attempts that keep trying the same
> password.
That's great! I wish mine could do this. For now I am only parsing the
logs of
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, at 13:45, Al Iverson wrote:
> Thus, I don't see this as much of a real issue, to be honest.
I agree. Still, I'd prefer some way to convince users to update their
configurations.
> But if you're looking for ideas on how to ease your personal pain:
> You could null route th
Hi fellow mailops,
Often when user's mail accounts get canceled they do not remove or
update their MUAs' configuration. Hence, I see a lot of repeated login
attempts.
Apart from the fact that this is a waste of a number of resources,
these attempts also trigger my intrusion detection system (
Hi Brandon,
On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, at 13:41, Brandon Long wrote:
> It is a netblock quota you're hitting, yes. As we see more and
> larger hit and run spam jobs from previously unknown or low volume
> IPs and netblocks, the low volume senders are caught in the cross
> fire.
>
> I'll ping the s
On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, at 08:19, Franck Martin wrote:
> Have you considered that may be it is not postfix sending these
> emails from your IP?
Yes, of course. This particular server is not even generating enough
traffic according to the firewall to qualify as bulk sender. Besides,
if there was a
We are not forwarding, we are not sending spam, in fact we are not
even sending bulk mail at all, still we get rate limited by Google.
Strangely enough, right since I verified my domain schamanek.net for
postmaster.google.com we get rate limited every few days. E.g.
Feb 2 16:52:04 iac postf
38 matches
Mail list logo
