Once upon a time, John Levine said:
> The usual suggestions are postfix and exim. Exim has somewhat more
> built in, e.g., DKIM signing, postfix seems somewhat more popular.
> Both are well supported on mailing lists with active help from the
> maintainers.
I think these are the only two major
My $DAYJOB has a service that does some email processing for customers
with Microsoft email, where MS gets a message, passes it to us with a
criteria based route, and then we pass it back to MS. We are setting up
ARC to meet MS's requirements, and I have found that MS is passing
messages to us
Once upon a time, Jaroslaw Rafa said:
> You can very well have a GUI when using KVM - virt-manager is a very nice
> piece of GUI to manage virtual machines running under KVM...
>
> Of course it's not a web-GUI, ie. virt-manager is just an ordinary X
> application running on the host OS (I
Once upon a time, Alexander Huynh said:
> Good news is there's a draft RFC presented at IETF 119 to tackle this:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dweekly-wrong-recipient/
Good luck on the problem senders implementing it... if they cared,
they'd already have something. I also get money
Once upon a time, Brielle said:
> E-mail addresses aren't guaranteed to actually belong to the person you think
> you are sending to.
Yep - I recently started getting debt collection emails to a Gmail I
don't give out (only used for Google stuff). I've had the Gmail account
since the beta days,
Once upon a time, Alexandre Dangreau said:
> Hello,
>
> > there are other providers in the same price range which assign /64.
>
> The VPS/PCI price start at 4€ per month. Not sure you will be able to find
> server with /64 IPv6 at this price.
Linode/Akamai has $5/month VMs that include a
Once upon a time, Alexandre Dangreau said:
> In fact, if you need a /64 IPv6 range you probably use the wrong service. For
> VPS and Public Cloud instances (PCI) the IPv6 range is shared with all the
> VM, so each VM (VPS or PCI) have one single IPv4 (/32) and one single IPv6
> (/128).
>
>
Once upon a time, Cyril - ImprovMX said:
> Just to clarify, I'm not trying to pin some issue on a company (Google) but
> I'm trying to understand why aiosmtpd seems to follow an RFC that
> appears to be clear on the behavior, that GMail doesn't do but doesn't
> appear to be the only one (as my
I guess companies are using hand-rolled DMARC report generators that
don't pay attention to standards... just on my personal domains, I see
multiple kinds of failures. Today I've had several with an invalid
Message-Id header (no brackets, I see this from multiple sites so I
guess some common
Once upon a time, Jaroslaw Rafa said:
> Dnia 25.08.2023 o godz. 09:48:35 Chris Adams via mailop pisze:
> >
> > So even for transactional messages, there's usually an account making
> > the purchase, or something is being delivered to an address, or the
> > like.
Once upon a time, Brotman, Alex said:
> Are you suggesting that an unsub results in a suppression? That hardly seems
> ideal. That seems to suggest I sign up for a brand's email list. Order some
> stuff, get receipt. Later unsub. Later buy again, but get no receipt?
> (Presuming it comes
Once upon a time, Paul Menzel said:
> I guess it’s ignorance, and that nobody complains to them. Depending
> on your jurisdiction you can report this case to the “data privacy
> office”, and you can contact the data protection officer of the
> offending company.
I hadn't thought about trying
Once upon a time, Mike Hillyer said:
> You get a doordash status message, you decide you don't need them, you
> unsubscribe. A couple of months later you need to reset your password and now
> you never get the reset link because you unsubscribed from transactional
> messages? Sure, we can get
Once upon a time, Christine Borgia said:
> Because it's not a subscription. The person is entering the email address
> where they want their order info to go, and they are entering your email.
> The onus is on that person and not the vendor.
That's a very vendor-centric look at it. When I get
What do you do when legitimate mail (lately, DoorDash order info and
Delta Airlines tickets) is sent to the wrong address? These types of
messages rarely have an unsubscribe method. I get a ton of crap to a
Gmail address that I really only use for Google-related stuff (not as a
general email
Once upon a time, Sean Kamath said:
> That’s how I learned BSD4.3’s csh had a fun history expression “bug” (it
> caused csh to coredump):
Yeah well, csh considered harmful. :)
--
Chris Adams
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
Once upon a time, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo said:
> Tobias Fiebig via mailop writes:
> > If I read RFC8461 correctly, this is not required for MTA-STS policies:
>
> Until they formally override POSIX, they have to abide by it.
Since POSIX has nothing to do with network communication protocols for
I have a Gmail address - I don't give it out, the only legit mail I get
to it is generally Google account related stuff (bills and such). I
have a forward set up on it to send everything to my personal server.
This morning, there was some spam that got through Gmail's filters sent
to it. Gmail
Once upon a time, Jim Popovitch said:
> I agree. Self hosted email is not hard, and it's just not super easy. :)
>
> The much harder aspect of email is getting your peers, family, and
> friends to adopt encryption.
Self-hosted email is hard (or really, impossible) for a high enough
percentage
Once upon a time, Ángel said:
> On 2022-08-21 at 15:18 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Also, I believe you can offer both RSA and EC certs, so shouldn't be
> > a negative to getting an EC cert (you just need to have RSA too).
>
> How would you do that?
>
> You could use different certificates on
Once upon a time, Slavko said:
> BTW, Chris, if ssl-enum-ciphers nmap's script was not updated recently
> (1-3 years -- i do not remember when exactly i tried it last), do not
> rely on it, it doesn't support TLS1.3...
The version included with nmap 7.92 does recognize and enumerate
TLSv1.3.
--
Once upon a time, Alexander Huynh said:
> On 2022-08-21 19:46:31 +, Slavko via mailop wrote:
> >Is that typo? AFAIK both these cipher suites are usable only
> >with RSA certificate, they difers only by ephemeral key exchange
> >algo...
>
> Sorry, you're right that it's a typo. I just
Once upon a time, Lukas Tribus said:
> No, you didn't just disable SHA1. You disabled all MACs except SHA256
> and SHA384, including the crucial AEAD MAC for modern GCM ciphers.
Ahh, my mistake, sorry. The code in question is actually Java and sets
a list of ciphers, which both openssl s_client
I ran into an issue at $DAYJOB where we had a hard-coded TLS version and
ciphersuite set connecting to Google (specifically aspmx.l.google.com).
The problem turned out to be a library upgrade had disabled SHA1, so the
TLS hello handshake failed.
Here's an example to reproduce it with gnutls-cli:
Once upon a time, John Levine said:
> Same here. I set up a kludge to rewrite From: headers several years
> ago (not rewriting to the list address, which sucks) and it still
> works fine.
Is there a standard for doing rewrites like that? Because I like to see
actual senders in the From: line
Is there anybody from EarthLink who can contact me off-list?
We are seeing emails sent to EarthLink recipients have the From header
domain overwritten with the CNAME the domain points to and would like to
discuss.
Thanks.
~ Chris
___
mailop mailing list
Once upon a time, Joel M Snyder said:
> Since this is happening in a number of countries, it's hard to
> discern exactly why 8.8.8.8 is given the exception
Possibly because some consumer equipment and software appears to have
8.8.8.8 hard-coded, ignoring local (e.g. DHCP-provided) settings.
Hi --
We are seeing some odd behavior with emails delivered to recipient
mailboxes protected by Carrierzone (https://carrierzone.com/).
Emails leaving our platform have a proper From header. However, when they
are received by Carrierzone, both the From and Return-Path headers have had
the domain
Once upon a time, John Levine said:
> That sounds like two equal priority MX records. No problem with that.
>
> Personally I'd use two A records for one name, but whatever.
IIRC from back in the day, when I ran sendmail for an ISP, the host
status tracking was done by hostname, not by IP.
Just an idle Sunday question... how long do you have your mail server(s)
configured to queue and retry messages before bouncing them back to the
sender?
I know back in the day, 5 days was the norm, to handle servers that were
only sometimes connected, outages, etc. I think that's still the
Once upon a time, Grant Taylor said:
> On 8/15/19 11:17 AM, Mark Milhollan via mailop wrote:
> >perhaps a way can be found for your MUA to help you
>
> It's a complete hack.
>
> But I use procmail to doctor messages as they come into my mailbox.
> I mostly add List-Post: header if it doesn't
I have customers that (unwisely) depend on sending email to SMS via the
@vtext.com gateway. Lately, the messages have been periodically backing
up in our queues because the Cloudmark SMTP servers reject the messages.
I get different error responses:
452 4.1.1 requested action aborted: try again
Once upon a time, Grant Taylor via mailop said:
> On 4/28/19 11:35 AM, John Levine via mailop wrote:
> >Oversigning those headers is silly.
>
> Oversigning may be /silly/. But it's still the sending site's choice.
So should mailing lists reject such messages? If they're going to add
headers
33 matches
Mail list logo
