Re: [mailop] [E] Re: AT Block

On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 12:53 PM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > > Instead of grumbling, if you can give us information, perhaps someone here > can help you. > > You are right - if an IP is blocked, it's likely blocked for a reason. The question is whether that

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: AT Block

On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 3:23 PM John Levine wrote: > It appears that Scott Mutter via mailop said: > >-=-=-=-=-=- > >-=-=-=-=-=- > > > >On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 7:54 AM Alessandro Vesely via mailop < > >In my opinion this is where the industry coul

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: AT Block

On Sun, Jul 7, 2024 at 7:54 AM Alessandro Vesely via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > It seems to me that large operators don't care a tinker's cuss about > blocking > small operators. If I'm unable to send to Outlook users, it is my fault > by > definition, certainly not Outlook's. > > In

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: AT Block

On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 10:54 AM Marcel Becker via mailop wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2024 at 9:27 AM Scott Mutter via mailop > wrote: > > We're all on this mailing list to learn (aren't we?). Maybe take some of >> the input you see from the messages on this mailing list a

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: AT Block

On Sat, Jul 6, 2024 at 10:26 AM Marcel Becker via mailop wrote: > > ATT runs their own inbound servers. Lili is not ATT. Please always use > official support channels first. > > That's kind of the issue. Nobody responds when you write abuse_...@abuse-att.net Why is that address included in the

[mailop] AT Block

Anyone from AT on the list that can assist with the blacklisting of the IPs: 23.239.97.150 5.101.141.35 Message is 553 5.3.0 alph749 DNSBL:RBL 521< 23.239.97.150 >_is_blocked.For assistance forward this error to abuse_...@abuse-att.net As is the usual case, I've gotten no response from an

Re: [mailop] Cloudmark blocklist

On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 9:24 AM James Hoddinott via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > Your main issue is that Transip sure do like to let spammers make use of > many IPs within the /24 that you're in, we'll just need to flag yours as > separate to prevent this from reoccurring. > > Wouldn't

Re: [mailop] [E] Yahoo/AOL Blocking

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:31 AM Marcel Becker via mailop wrote: > I assume you have already reached out to the official Yahoo postmaster > support team via the link conveniently provided in the SMTP response? > > No response on that ticket in over 24 hours. And the IP address is still blocked.

Re: [mailop] Outlook JMRP IP Feedback not available

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:15 PM Al Iverson wrote: > Try jumping directly to the appropriate "view data" page in SNDS for this > IP. > How? Use my little jumper widget here: > https://www.wombatmail.com/jump.cgi?d= > Plug in the IP, and it will convert the IP to the right format for the > SNDS

[mailop] Outlook JMRP IP Feedback not available

What would cause an IP address to not show as being available for Outlook's JMRP? Going to https://postmaster.live.com/snds and using the link for Access Control, the IP in question is shown as being authorized to view data about. But clicking on Junk Mail Reporting Program and then clicking

[mailop] Yahoo/AOL Blocking

Anybody from Yahoo/AOL able to assist with what's causing the IP address - 67.222.148.107 - to be blocked? All messages from 67.222.148.107 will be permanently deferred; Retrying will NOT succeed. See https://postmaster.yahooinc.com/error-codes Messages have DKIM and DMARC IP is not listed in

[mailop] Cloudmark Blocklist

Anyone from Cloudmark able to assist with why the IP address: 67.222.148.107 is listed in their blacklist? I filled out the form https://csi.cloudmark.com/en/reset two days ago. I got the Confirm CSI IP Address Statistics Reset Request email and responded to it. But the IP still appears to

Re: [mailop] AT Blocklist

On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 8:31 PM Jeff Peng via mailop wrote: > Mike is right. > > mx1.amscomputer.com has an A RR 107.181.229.51 which points back its > PTR to zephyr.wznoc.com. > > the two domains are not matched, hence messages sent from this server > will be rejected by postfix's such

Re: [mailop] AT Blocklist

On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 6:18 PM Michael Peddemors via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > https://wznoc.com/ > > With a obscure page like that, you are asking for trouble.. > Just like the pages many of the bullet proof hosters throw up.. > > Why not use amscomputer.com in the PTR records, if

[mailop] AT Blocklist

What's going on with AT? They're blocking our mail servers left and right (IPs aren't on any other blacklist mind you) and not hearing a peep from abuse_...@abuse-att.net. What's the point of having your blocked message state to send an email to abuse_...@abuse-att.net if nobody is going to

Re: [mailop] Microsoft SNDS website not working

I don't know if it's completely broken... but it's definitely very sick and not well. Keep hitting refresh, it will eventually load (at least it does for me). But I believe this is indicative of some problems on the backend of this website and maybe of the entire Microsoft postmaster/SNDS/JMRPP

Re: [mailop] Microsoft SNDS website not working

Yea, I got all of mine this morning when I checked. I guess they found whatever was causing the issue and fixed it. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Microsoft SNDS website not working

Yea, the authorization emails aren't coming through. I don't know if they aren't being sent or if they're being stopped some where else. But it's been 10 hours and I still haven't received the authorization verification email. > ___ mailop mailing

Re: [mailop] Microsoft SNDS website not working

I'm still not getting the authorization emails. But maybe that's just me. I seem to recall that these emails aren't instant and sometimes take several hours to come in. > ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] Microsoft SNDS website not working

Trying to add an IP address to our SNDS accounts at: https://sendersupport.olc.protection.outlook.com/snds/index.aspx Is resulting in a lot of failed page loads, a lot of having to refresh, authorization emails seemingly not being sent. Anyone else having issues with Microsoft's SNDS site? Is

Re: [mailop] Apple/iCloud message blocking

On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 10:43 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > What address did you send it from? We don’t seem to see any email from > your address so can you please resend it. > > > --srs > postmas...@olympic.wznoc.com The apple.com mail server doesn't return any traceable message id upon

Re: [mailop] Apple/iCloud message blocking

Day 3 - still no response from icloudad...@apple.com. Guessing there's nobody from Apple or iCloud is on this list. And nobody at Apple/iCloud really cares. favicon.ico Description: Binary data ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org

Re: [mailop] Apple/iCloud message blocking

On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 12:24 PM Faisal Misle wrote: > Have you tried contacting them as per their postmaster page? > > Postmaster information for iCloud Mail - Apple Support > > support.apple.com > [image:

[mailop] Apple/iCloud message blocking

Anyone from Apple/iCloud able to assist with why certain messages from one of our servers - 67.215.1.235 - to certain @icloud.com email addresses are bouncing back with: 554 5.7.1 [CS01] Message rejected due to local policy. Please visit https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137 Bounce back

Re: [mailop] Google Postmaster Tools

It's basically worthless unless you are a big box sender. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] RSA-SHA1 DKIM signatures still in use?

How is everyone handling senders that sign their emails with RSA-SHA1 DKIM keys? I'm a bit surprised to see eBay and Match.com sending out messages using SHA-1. I'm seeing a lot of signatures coming in that use SHA-1 but most of the domains are questionable at best. But eBay and Match.com

Re: [mailop] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead?

On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 9:56 AM Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote: > Whether an email passes SPF or DKIM is no indicator of whether its spam. > It just allows you to tie messages to the reputation of a domain, similar > as you rate messages based on the IP address they are coming from. > While I'm

Re: [mailop] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead?

On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 12:20 PM Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > > Am 08.02.2024 schrieb Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop : > > > > > But forwarding an email from a domain that have DMARC enabled (with a > > > policy different than "none") could still work if the

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Spamfolder mini rant (Was: Contact Google Postmaster)

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 10:01 AM Todd Herr via mailop wrote: > Users can only click "This is spam" on messages that end up in their > inbox. If all of your traffic went to the spam folder, perhaps because it > was unfortunately remarkably similar to previous traffic that was deemed > spam, you

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Spamfolder mini rant (Was: Contact Google Postmaster)

> It would also give feedback to spammers allowing them to fine-tune their > messages to avoid getting flagged. What about feedback loops? Don't those also fall into the category of aiding the spammer? But they are also a tool for legitimate mail server administrators to combat spam on their

Re: [mailop] Spamfolder mini rant (Was: Contact Google Postmaster)

What if the receiving mail server tagged the message in some way in their final acknowledgement of the message. For Google. instead of: 250 2.0.0 OK 1706409809 h4-20020ac8584400b10427e71c979dsi9837397zyh.449 - gsmtp If the message is redirected to the user's spambox, the message could be:

Re: [mailop] Contact Google Postmaster

I've had domains listed in Google Postmaster Tools since 2016. Never gotten one lick of any information from any of those except for "No data to display at this time. Please come back later. Postmaster Tools requires that your domain satisfies certain conditions before data is visible for this

Re: [mailop] [E] Contact Google Postmaster

>> I'm not seeing where 173.225.104.91 is on any public blacklist. > That is also not relevant. Your reputation and what receivers think about your email is relevant. Maybe not, but please pray tell how else I'm suppose to know the reputation of my server's IP address? Does Google have a public

[mailop] Contact Google Postmaster

It seems messages being sent from 173.225.104.91 are being delivered into Gmail user's spam boxes. These messages are DKIM signed, pass SPF and DMARC. I'm not seeing where 173.225.104.91 is on any public blacklist. Anyone from Google able to shed any light on this? Thanks

Re: [mailop] DMARC processing

If DMARC reports could be sent in JSON format, they would be more easily parseable. At least, that's my opinion. On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 2:47 AM Eduardo Diaz Comellas via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm starting to deploy DMARC records in all our managed domains, but we > don't

[mailop] AT Blacklist - 205.251.153.98

Anybody from AT able to provide any insight as to why 205.251.153.98 is being blacklisted? Sent an email to abuse_...@abuse-att.net back on October 26, never got a response. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Hotmail: why S1350 blocking every 3 months?

I think sometimes these "too big to fail" mail service providers block IPs just because they can. Who are your users going to believe? It has to be something you the small time email service provider is doing wrong, it can't possibly be good ol "insert big brand here". I certainly understand

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

 PM Scott Mutter wrote: > Nope. Still the same. > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 9:42 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian < > ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Check again now >> >> --srs >> ------ >> *From:* mailop on behalf of Scott M

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

Nope. Still the same. On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 9:42 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Check again now > > --srs > -- > *From:* mailop on behalf of Scott Mutter via > mailop > *Sent:* Saturday, September 23, 2023 1:52:25 AM > *To:* mailo

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

of arm twisting to get any response at all. On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 7:56 PM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Ok we will check > > > --srs > -- > *From:* mailop on behalf of Scott Mutter via > mailop > *Sent:* Thursday, September 21, 2023 10

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

ter with a recent sample of the > logs? Bcc me at s...@apple.com so I can follow up with the team. > > > > *From: *mailop on behalf of Scott Mutter via > mailop > *Date: *Thursday, 21 September 2023 at 8:00 PM > *To: *mailop@mailop.org > *Subject: *Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud b

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

How long should I have to wait for a response? I haven't heard anything back and icloud is still rejecting the message due to local policy. On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 9:07 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I will have the team check and reply to you > > > > *From: *Scott

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

visit https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204137 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:56 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > From which address? > > > > *From: *mailop on behalf of Scott Mutter via > mailop > *Date: *Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 6:25 PM > *To: *mailop@mailop.org

Re: [mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

I wrote icloudad...@apple.com on August 26, 2023 On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:03 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I’ll have someone look at your email and reply if they haven’t yet > > --srs > -- > *From:* mailop on behalf of Scott Mutter via &g

[mailop] Apple/icloud blocking - Message rejected due to local policy

Anybody from Apple/iCloud able to provide any insight as to why messages from 209.236.124.55 are being blocked with - Message rejected due to local policy messages? I previously sent a message to icloudad...@apple.com but got no response. ___ mailop

Re: [mailop] Google - Messages with multiple addresses in From: header are not accepted.

Thanks. It's actually the mailing script this client is using that is adding the headers in this way. I will have to get with the client to resolve this. That answers that issue. On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 9:53 AM Scott Mutter wrote: > We're seeing an increase of errors from Google's m

[mailop] Google - Messages with multiple addresses in From: header are not accepted.

We're seeing an increase of errors from Google's mail servers complaining about multiple addresses in the From header. But these messages do not have multiple addresses in the From headers or multiple From headers. Best I can tell, this seems to be caused by additional spaces in some of the

Re: [mailop] New Validity policy for paid FBL (ARF)

, Oliver via mailop < > mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > >> On 13.09.2023 at 16:06 Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: >> >> > I also think one thing that Validity may not be understanding with this >> move, and may lead to shooting themselves in the foot, the list of email &

Re: [mailop] New Validity policy for paid FBL (ARF)

I also think one thing that Validity may not be understanding with this move, and may lead to shooting themselves in the foot, the list of email service providers that Validity provides feedback for isn't exactly major players. We get more feedback from Yahoo and Outlook's FBL system than we do

Re: [mailop] New Validity policy for paid FBL (ARF)

I thought Validity was making the free FBL more like Google's Postmaster Tools FBL. Which, I've never gotten one iota of anything relevant in Google's FBL system. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that this is going to be the future of FBLs. I think providers want to be able to block certain

Re: [mailop] New Validity policy for paid FBL (ARF)

How an FBL is supposed to be used versus how an FBL is used is always a topic for discussion that can be applied to anything. How many of us expect email to be delivered instantly? But where is it defined that email has to be delivered the second the sender clicks that send button? But we all

[mailop] Cloudmark not sending remediation confirmation email?

Anybody from Cloudmark aware of any issues with their CSI IP Reputation Remediation Portal form? I've filled out the form - https://csi.cloudmark.com/en/reset - twice, I get the message: *An email has been sent to the email address you provided. Please follow the instructions in this email to

Re: [mailop] abuse_...@abuse-att.net is broken

Half the time they never respond to their abuse complaints. There's a huge thread on their forums: https://forums.att.com/conversations/att-mail-login-security/rbl-ip-unblock-request-and-abuse_rblabuseattnet-is-not-responding/5e620c10758fed5c61aea8ff Dates back several years. Occasionally it

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Office365 not rejecting emails when instructed so by SPF recored?

On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 12:34 PM Brandon Long wrote: > When forwarding mail, there are two options: rewrite the envelope sender > or not. There are a variety of pros and cons to both of them, and cases > where one or the other is more prominent. Not rewriting has been the > dominant form of

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Office365 not rejecting emails when instructed so by SPF recored?

is in the disarray that it is. On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 10:38 PM Neil Jenkins via mailop wrote: > On Fri, 26 May 2023, at 11:10, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > > So basically SPF is worthless. > > > It's not worthless at all. It's a valuable signal to assign reputation as &g

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Office365 not rejecting emails when instructed so by SPF recored?

So basically SPF is worthless. You can define all the IPs that legitimate mail for the domain should be coming from and exclude everything else with a -all and mail servers are just supposed to ignore that and look for a DMARC record? Talk about robbing Peter to pay Paul. What's next? Another

Re: [mailop] Outlook JMRP unable to add new IP address

On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 4:52 PM Simon Arlott wrote: > If it's already in another JMRP feed you can't add it to a new one. Does > someone else have access to the network that contains the IP? They may > have created a JMRP feed and you're probably not able to see it. > > -- > Simon Arlott > > Has

[mailop] Outlook JMRP unable to add new IP address

Been a while since I've added an IP to our JMRP profile - but seems to not be working. I've done the request access for the IP and validated the IP by clicking the link in the email. But when I go to add the IP under the Junk Mail Reporting Program, the IP address is not shown. "If you want to

Re: [mailop] Spectrum/Charter.net Contact Available?

Kind of unnerving that this list gets filled with "Can someone from X company contact me about a block/rejection?" All because X companies that are too big to fail can't be bothered to provide any way to dispute a listing or get in touch with someone that actually administers their mail system.

Re: [mailop] Forum/Blog spam turned up to 11

Are there effective anti-bot measures in place on the form? How effective captcha systems are can be debatable. BUT, if there are no anti-bot measures on the form... then shouldn't this type of activity/abuse be expected? On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:48 PM Ken Simpson wrote: > > No idea whether

Re: [mailop] Forum/Blog spam turned up to 11

Are you sure it's actual people registering or is it bots? Do the sign up pages have effective captcha or other anti-bot/prove you're human measures? On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 7:30 PM Ken Simpson via mailop wrote: > > It's WooCommerce: >

Re: [mailop] forwarding to gmail - problem

If you forward your mail to Google then Google is going to get your email. If you give Google your POP password to retrieve mail, then Google is going to get your email. What more is Google going to get with your POP password versus plain old forwarding email? On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 6:00 AM

Re: [mailop] forwarding to gmail - problem

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:47 AM Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote: > I would say the opposite. Mail forwarding was there before SPF, so anybody > who designed SPF should have taken that into account. They didn't. So SPF is > the "bad guy" here among these two. SPF is the one that breaks forwarding,

Re: [mailop] forwarding to gmail - problem

On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 7:20 PM Mark Milhollan via mailop wrote: > It does not. As recently discussed, Gmail plays a game of trying to > guess whether SPF should have failed on a previous hop, rather than just > the connected peer. I don't really see that much of an issue with this in popping

Re: [mailop] forwarding to gmail - problem

Automatic email forwarders are generally a bad idea, at least in my humble opinion. They're always going to fail SPF unless you rewrite the sender-envelope, which I also don't think is a good idea. Ultimately, the argument generally comes down to "well, these used to work" and that's part of the

Re: [mailop] Yahoo FBL per IP Range?

Been preaching about this for years. Have yet to get anybody of value's attention. If you're going to block mail servers by IP address (which, to be clear, I don't have a problem with providers doing this - and Yahoo does this along with countless other mail services), then you need to have a

Re: [mailop] FYI - Google/Gmail hard enforcing SPF presence

It depends on what Google mail server you are sending to. Some require SPF, some don't. Although, maybe they've since closed that loophole. Google started requiring SPF records back in December 2021 according to the logs I reviewed (at least for some of their mail servers). The mail servers

Re: [mailop] Musings on Mail Service Operators

A lot of the issues stem from the way IT managers, and maybe technology managers in general bathe in arrogance. "There's no such thing as a good idea, unless it is *my* idea." It's easier to get blood out of a stone than for someone in IT to admit that someone else's approach to something has

Re: [mailop] Forms vs email abuse reporting

not really sure if that's the type of abuse contact the OP was referring to in this thread. On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 8:07 PM Michael Rathbun via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 15:55:40 -0600, Scott Mutter via mailop > wrote: > > >(AT is just an exa

Re: [mailop] Forms vs email abuse reporting

It depends on what context you are referring to. Are you talking about abuse contact as a means to dispute abuse complaints? In that case, I'd say a form is better. An example is AT When AT blocks our server, the bounce back message tells us to send an email to abuse_...@abuse-att.net. I'm

Re: [mailop] [SUBJECT CHANGE] Feedback loops

On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 6:06 PM Grant Taylor via mailop wrote: > Why can't automated and manual reports go to the same address? Isn't > that what recipient side filtering is for? E.g. separating RFC standard > DSNs / MDNs from human generated messages, each handled by different teams. > > My

Re: [mailop] still not a good way to publish contact info, was What am I supposed to do

aid: > >-=-=-=-=-=- > >-=-=-=-=-=- > > > >On 1/17/22 11:49 AM, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > >> Do reverse DNS entries support the TXT structure? > > > >I can't remember the last time I used it to say with any certainty. But > >would completely expect that it would. Remembe

Re: [mailop] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:06 PM Grant Taylor via mailop wrote: > Drive by comment: > > What if we had something like an MX record published for the IP > address(es) in reverse DNS / in-addr.arpa for > ... and configure those MX records to route to a mail server > of the owners /

Re: [mailop] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 5:32 AM Alessandro Vesely via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > I'm not clear what you mean by "secure your own IP block". > > Besides, for the mxroute address you wrote from, 149.28.56.236, I find an > abuse address of ab...@vultr.com, which looks like your ISP's. >

Re: [mailop] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

you've lost touch with reality. On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 9:13 PM Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote: > On 1/13/22 16:08, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > > I'm not sure what value of Recipients is really referring to - but I > > think this is kind of the question that needs to be

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

> Domain reputation is a thing though. If your IP really gets blocked (and not just throttled; that's a signal you have access to btw) you usually have a bigger problem. Unfortunately, that's not what I'm seeing in the real world. Everything is IP based. Go through the archives here at Mailops.

Re: [mailop] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

at 4:23 PM Grant Taylor via mailop wrote: > On 1/13/22 1:00 PM, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > > The person sending out the mails or mailing list often doesn't care if > > their recipients are flagging messages as spam or if their messages are > > being treated as spam or

Re: [mailop] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

I think some of what's lost in this discussion - and it's true this may be dragging the discussion off-topic, but seems as good a time as any to bring this up. Often times the individual maintaining the mailing list or sending out the emails, is not the same individual that administers and

Re: [mailop] [E] What am I supposed to do with abuse complaints on legit mail?

Yahoo's Feedback Loop is DomainKey based, but their blocking is IP based. At least that's how it used to be. Never made much sense to me to have an FBL based on DomainKeys, meaning every domain name that sends from an IP address has to have a registered feedback loop based on the DomainKey. All

Re: [mailop] No answer from abuse-att.net?

This is why I cringe everytime I see a provider asking you to "send an email to x...@yyy.com to get delisted." x...@yyy.com is going to get flooded with spam also. Whoever is on the receiving end of that email address isn't going to know what's legitimate and what's not legitimate. It's so much

Re: [mailop] Is there any analysis on root causes of mail account break-ins?

espondence. So they choose a simple and easy to remember password. On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 2:17 PM Slavko via mailop wrote: > Hi, > > Dňa Wed, 17 Nov 2021 13:31:50 -0600 Scott Mutter via mailop > napísal: > > > Unless you are sending an encrypted password to your

Re: [mailop] Is there any analysis on root causes of mail account break-ins?

>If one use good email client/browser, locally stored passwords are not a > problem as they are encrypted Unless you are sending an encrypted password to your mail server (in which case, the compromiser still has the necessary to log into your email account) then this has to be decrypted some how

Re: [mailop] Is there any analysis on root causes of mail account break-ins?

Don't forget local compromises - keyloggers, spyware, and other malware - running on an end-user's system. If you are checking your email with an email client and not entering your password every time you check for mail (which most of us don't do) then the password to your email is stored some

Re: [mailop] ATT.NET abuse_...@abuse-att.net contact ?

Just keep sending them an email everyday. Sometimes you have to send an email a day for a week or two before they pick up on it. Not sure why they haven't created a website form to submit these. Relying on email for delisting like this is a recipe for disaster. What do we set the Subject as to

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Vade - Blacklisting

gt; Comcast > > > > *From:* mailop *On Behalf Of *Scott Mutter > via mailop > *Sent:* Monday, August 16, 2021 9:08 PM > *To:* mailop@mailop.org > *Subject:* Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Vade - Blacklisting > > > > Thanks Alex. > > > > This looks to be working

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Vade - Blacklisting

; > > > > > > > -- > > Alex Brotman > > Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy > > Comcast > > > > *From:* mailop *On Behalf Of *Scott Mutter > via mailop > *Sent:* Monday, August 16, 2021 2:25 PM > *To:* mailop@mailop.org > *Subject:

Re: [mailop] Vade - Blacklisting

company like Comcast (?) going to bed with such an entity? On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:03 PM Al Iverson wrote: > You might find https://sendertool.vadesecure.com/ to be a better way > to work through the issue. > > Good luck, > Al Iverson > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:24 PM Sc

[mailop] Vade - Blacklisting

Anybody from Vade on the list able to give any details as to why 66.11.124.112 is listed? Apparently Comcast uses Vade as part of their blacklist and this IP is being blocked by Comcast's mail servers 554 resimta-po-40v.sys.comcast.net resimta-po-40v.sys.comcast.net 66.11.124.112 found on one or

Re: [mailop] So how do you actually manage to send mails to outlook/hotmail?

> If your correspondent opens a ticket with MS and says "I want to get email from Marcus and it goes into spam and I don't think it should", they may put mitigation in for you. It has less effect if you are the one opening the ticket though. What ticket form would these people need to fill out?

Re: [mailop] Malware waves from hotmail.com

URLs' > >that you need to parse instead of via say a rwhois entry. > > > >(some are listed at various services you can query in RBL format > >such as > >RATS-AZURE) > > > >Some you can check via PTR naming conventions, and others you can > >do an > &

Re: [mailop] Malware waves from hotmail.com

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 1:24 PM Michael Peddemors via mailop < mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > With apache, you can use modsecurity quite easily, and you can block all > azure (and other cloud providers ranges) from certain services like > wordpress, or contact forms etc.. (you can even do dns based

Re: [mailop] Malware waves from hotmail.com

Not to hijack this thread and send it off-topic, but I'm also seeing a lot of brute force attempts (mostly WordPress login attempts) from various and wide-ranging subnets of Microsoft IPs. Has Microsoft's network been compromised? On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 10:46 AM Jörg Backschues via mailop <

Re: [mailop] protection.outlook.com refusing to accept mail with misleading temp error message

The issue - at least to me - has always been that Microsoft is viewed as this big, huge company that can do no wrong. When our users have issues sending to Microsoft email servers - it's obviously because *we're* stupid and something is wrong with *our* server. It can't possibly be a Microsoft

Re: [mailop] [EXTERNAL] Re: Registered @ Microsoft JMRP - blacklisted without feedback received

Not to really defend Microsoft here - because I've had my own run-ins with their system and agree that it doesn't make a lot of sense. But this isn't an only-Microsoft problem. Pretty much every big-name mail service provider will employ similar tactics in some capacity. I get it... Microsoft

Re: [mailop] Microsoft Consumer Email Deliverability Issue

The fact that filling out their support ticket does nothing except generate canned responses and that you have to come here to Mailops to get any movement on a blocked IP address or blocked server - you would think that that would tell Microsoft something about how ineffective their support ticket

Re: [mailop] Gmail issues with Level 3 / Tier.Net?

March 5th. On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 11:54 AM J. Hellenthal wrote: > trace routes ? Pings ? Anything here? > > -- > J. Hellenthal > > The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says > a lot about anticipated traffic volume. > > > On Mar 6, 20

[mailop] Gmail issues with Level 3 / Tier.Net?

Some of our servers have not received emails from Gmail since early Friday morning. We're also not able to connect to some of Gmail's mail servers from these servers. Is Gmail blocking some of these IPs? A routing issue? Anybody from Gmail able to contact me off list to look into this?

Re: [mailop] Hotmail and block on OVH: possible solutions alternatives?

wrote: > Dnia 25.02.2021 o godz. 11:53:44 Scott Mutter via mailop pisze: > > I'll end this little soapbox rant acknowledging that I don't really have > a > > solution to this. How is Microsoft supposed to know that a USER of an IP > > address is a well-respec

Re: [mailop] [E] Re: IP based reporting for Yahoo feedback loop gone?

> I don't think so. I'm primarily a datacenter operator and > commercial-only ISP and my AUP says no spamming. As the proactive type > that prefers to prevent spamming instead of ignoring it for profit, I do > like to know if anyone is emitting spam from any of our IP space. > Feedback loops based

Re: [mailop] IP based reporting for Yahoo feedback loop gone?

There was once an IP based one? I only ever knew of the DKIM one. Which never made a lot of sense to me - since with shared hosting there can be multiple domains sending mail from an IP. To configure DKIM and the DKIM feedback loop for every domain wasn't practical. On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at

  1   2   >