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

> On 15.02.2024 at 03:55 Philip Paeps wrote: > > On 2024-02-15 02:51:17 (+0800), Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote: >>> On 13.02.2024 at 17:05 John Levine via mailop wrote: >>> More to the point, whether it's DKIM nor S/MIME or PGP, bad guys can >>> and do sign their mail, too. >> True, however I

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

Dnia 15.02.2024 o godz. 10:54:56 Philip Paeps via mailop pisze: > > Having said that: I have seen S/MIME and even PGP signed spear fishing. I'd dare to say, that aginst *spear* phishing there is no viable technical protection. The only protection against this is common sense and awareness of the

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

On 14/02/2024 20:44, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote: Do you have more information about passkeys in regards to S/MIME certificates? This sounds interesting. Or do you only mean that passkeys as well as S/MIME both use asymmetric keys? I just meant that passkeys are a real-life example how

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

On 2024-02-15 02:51:17 (+0800), Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote: On 13.02.2024 at 17:05 John Levine via mailop wrote: It appears that Taavi Eomäe via mailop said: On 13/02/2024 05:16, John Levine via mailop wrote: Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM

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

It appears that Gellner, Oliver via mailop said: > >> On 13.02.2024 at 17:05 John Levine via mailop wrote: >> It appears that Taavi Eomäe via mailop said: >>> >>> On 13/02/2024 05:16, John Levine via mailop wrote: Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM

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

> On 13.02.2024 at 17:05 John Levine via mailop wrote: > It appears that Taavi Eomäe via mailop said: >> >> On 13/02/2024 05:16, John Levine via mailop wrote: >>> Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM >>> signature, you >>> can be quite confident that it came

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

> On 13.02.2024 at 10:11 Taavi Eomäe via mailop wrote: > > I've described one of the reasons why that's the case. The other reason is > probably the fact that key management is incredibly difficult. Which is also > probably why it has seen adoption in environments that simplify it - large >

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

On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 21:31 +0900, Byunghee HWANG (황병희) via mailop wrote: > Hellow Cyril, > > On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 11:06 +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote: > > That's a good argument. I can do even better: > > > > Email is not designed for spam. Stop spamming. Problem solved. > > Yes,

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

> Even if you catch spam emails with SPF, I think you should be able to > distinguish between legitimate emails -- this is forwarding emails. SPF/DKIM/DMARC and spam are two entirely different things. Talking about spam and SPF is like talking about fish and fruit salad. I think John Levine now

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

Hellow Cyril, On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 11:06 +0100, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote: > That's a good argument. I can do even better: > > Email is not designed for spam. Stop spamming. Problem solved. Yes, you are right. And I know what you're thinking. But please give me a chance to say this.

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

That's a good argument. I can do even better: Email is not designed for spam. Stop spamming. Problem solved. ... Le mer. 14 févr. 2024 à 01:56, Benny Pedersen via mailop a écrit : > Byunghee HWANG via mailop skrev den 2024-02-14 01:00: > > > I really strongly agree with this opinion. That's

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

Hellow Benny, > (...) please be open minded, you already is using opensource Thanks, usually i don't say 'No' to someone i like. In any case. I'm going to try your advice someday. Thanks again Benny! Sincerely, Byunghee -- ^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))// signature.asc Description: This is a

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

Byunghee HWANG via mailop skrev den 2024-02-14 05:45: spf is not designed for forwarding, stop forwarding, problem solved Yes, you are right! good then :=) And if Google stops email service, i will also stop forwarding. https://wiki.debian.org/PostfixAndSASL see section SASL

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

Hellow Benny, > spf is not designed for forwarding, stop forwarding, problem solved Yes, you are right! And if Google stops email service, i will also stop forwarding. Sincerely, Byunghee -- ^고맙습니다 _布德天下_ 감사합니다_^))// signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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

Byunghee HWANG via mailop skrev den 2024-02-14 01:00: I really strongly agree with this opinion. That's why I wish people in the world didn't use SPF. SPF is a serious obstacle when forwarding. spf is not designed for forwarding, stop forwarding, problem solved dmarc need spf to find

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

Hellow Slavko, > If we will not change something, we will waste more power > in fighting, than for providing service. And IMO providing > service have to be goal... I really strongly agree with this opinion. That's why I wish people in the world didn't use SPF. SPF is a serious obstacle when

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

It appears that Marco Moock via mailop said: >> >>S/MIME will be applied to the forwarded messages and people will >> >>assume everything is fine even when the original message is forged. >> >> >> That’s why you apply S/MIME only if the original message can be >> verified as genuine, if your

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

Am 12.02.2024 um 15:35:30 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Nielsen: > >>If you forward spam (automatic forwarding), you will be listed as > >>the spammer because even DKIM is valid. > That’s why you do spam filtering in the forwarding server. There is no 100% solution for that and even a small amount of

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

Dňa 12. februára 2024 15:41:58 UTC používateľ Laura Atkins via mailop napísal: >In the face of those facts, what value does this bring to email? It seems as very good question, targeting the root of problem, as nobody was enough brave to argue... I ask more or less the same. Despite the fact,

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

It appears that Taavi Eomäe via mailop said: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 13/02/2024 05:16, John Levine via mailop wrote: >> Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM >> signature, you >> can be quite confident that it came from whichever Gmail or Yahoo

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

On 13/02/2024 05:16, John Levine via mailop wrote: Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM signature, you can be quite confident that it came from whichever Gmail or Yahoo user is in the From header. That's absolutely not the guarantee provided by DKIM though.

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

On 12/02/2024 21:57, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote: While it has gained respectable amounts of implementation in MUAs, it has achieved use only in specialized environments.  Any technology with a record that poor should be treated extremely skeptically, when considering future use I've

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

On 2/12/2024 7:13 PM, Mark Milhollan via mailop wrote: On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: Certificates are not magic symbols of safety. I never said they were.  I said, paraphrasing though I see I should have been explicit, that Google could increase the number of people using S/MIME

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

On 2/12/2024 7:16 PM, John Levine via mailop wrote: Right now if you get a message from Gmail or Yahoo with a valid DKIM signature, you can be quite confident that it came from whichever Gmail or Yahoo user is in the From header. By way of using this as an example of the need for larger

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

It appears that Mark Milhollan via mailop said: >On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: > >> 1. S/MIME has been around for 25 years.  While it has gained >>respectable amounts of implementation in MUAs, it has achieved use >>only in specialized environments.  > >Google could greatly

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

On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: On 2/12/2024 4:37 PM, Mark Milhollan via mailop wrote: On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: 1. S/MIME has been around for 25 years. While it has gained    respectable amounts of implementation in MUAs, it has achieved use    only in specialized

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

On 2/12/2024 4:37 PM, Mark Milhollan via mailop wrote: On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: 1. S/MIME has been around for 25 years. While it has gained    respectable amounts of implementation in MUAs, it has achieved use    only in specialized environments. Google could greatly

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

On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Dave Crocker wrote: 1. S/MIME has been around for 25 years.  While it has gained respectable amounts of implementation in MUAs, it has achieved use only in specialized environments.  Google could greatly accelerate its uptake by automatically providing every

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

> BIMI is a marketing protocol, for promoting brand logos. What anti-abuse > benefit do you believe accrues with its use, and how exactly do you believe > it will achieve that? > > d/ But Dave - It only costs $1300USD per domain and $500USD for each additional domain for the cert, not

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

On 2/9/2024 1:16 AM, Taavi Eomäe via mailop wrote: My hope is that at some point we would be able to do "BIMI" with just S/MIME signed mail at some point. Seems like a good combination. 1. S/MIME has been around for 25 years.  While it has gained respectable amounts of implementation in

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

On 2/9/2024 6:50 AM, Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: I think the issue with SPF and DKIM is that it's becoming trivial for ALL email to have SPF and DKIM that pass muster.  At which point, you're right back where you started. At the start, we had no way to assess email streams.  Good mixed

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

> Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 13:03:28 Philip Paeps via mailop pisze: > > > > Most people don't actually use email anymore. Email is for > > marketing and receipts. > > Yeah, that's probably the main reason why they can live with such > problematic service like Gmail. I've encountered more

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

It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- >You just regard all email which passes DMARC as trusted, as if the mail was >S/MIME signed by the sender personally.The sender has >chosen to trust that shared provider. Its not "your problem" as a receiver if >that

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

> On 12 Feb 2024, at 14:33, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop > wrote: > > >>Do they also allow you to search for the original sender? > No not via sender search, as the encapsulated email is part of the BODY of > the container email. > So usually you have to search via body search. So you are

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

Hi, On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 02:44:43PM +0100, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote: > >> it basically makes it impossible to respond to the original email sender > > Nope, you just open the encapsulated email (open the .EML attachment), and > respond to that. Going back to my anecdote that last

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

>>Do they also allow you to search for the original sender? No not via sender search, as the encapsulated email is part of the BODY of the container email. So usually you have to search via body search. >>And, again, what is the overall benefit to the end user from this scheme? Benefit is

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

Am 09.02.2024 um 13:59:57 Uhr schrieb Andy Smith via mailop: > When these people are your paying customers, or you are being paid > to get email to these people, there is limited up side in berating > people about their choice of mail service. A fact which of course is > used and abused by the

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

Am 09.02.2024 um 22:06:05 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Nielsen via mailop: > Or people could stop forwarding emails in idiotic ways, because when > you forward an email, you are actually forging the original sender. > > > Ergo, if you forward a email from genuineu...@genuineserver.com to >

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

Dnia 12.02.2024 o godz. 14:47:41 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop pisze: > When you pass traffic on layer 7, you are the de facto recipient of the > traffic, and when you then “resend” that received traffic somewhere else > than its actually destined, you become responsible. That’s why a reverse >

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

Am 10.02.2024 um 15:52:22 Uhr schrieb Andre van Eyssen: > On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > > > Outlook supports that and knowing about it is a question of > > training. > > I'd like to suggest that understanding of email is declining in the > general population. "Training"

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

> On 12 Feb 2024, at 13:44, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop > wrote: > > >> it basically makes it impossible to respond to the original email sender > Nope, you just open the encapsulated email (open the .EML attachment), and > respond to that. > > Some mail clients show the encapsulated

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

Dnia 12.02.2024 o godz. 14:44:43 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop pisze: > > Nope, you just open the encapsulated email (open the .EML attachment), and > respond to that. Very cumbersome. Speaking from my own experience. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa r...@rafa.eu.org -- "In a million years, when

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

>> An "anonymous" proxy, configured specifically to hide the original poster No, all proxies are per definition anonymous unless they specifically add the header X-Forwaded-For. Otherwise, the IP becomes “automatically” hidden, if it passes communication unmodified. That’s why they have become

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

>> it basically makes it impossible to respond to the original email sender Nope, you just open the encapsulated email (open the .EML attachment), and respond to that. Some mail clients show the encapsulated email in a “frame” which has its own reply buttons. Best regards, Sebastian

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

Dnia 12.02.2024 o godz. 12:15:08 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop pisze: > > However, if an end user SENDS something via the proxy, let's say a forum > post, the proxy usually bears the responsibility for the content, which we > have seen in numerous court cases where a proxy have been used to hide

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

The problem with encapsulating like that is it basically makes it impossible to respond to the original email sender. It destroys functionality that has been around since the early stages of email. If we’re going to break email for people, then we should at least give them some good reason to

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

Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop skrev den 2024-02-12 11:34: Dnia 12.02.2024 o godz. 01:36:09 Benny Pedersen via mailop pisze: if spf should be pr email addresses, thay could add ipv6 pr sender email :=) and have ipv4 with nullMX or simply remove ipv4 in mx, will it ever happen ? Yeah, use only IPv6

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

>>Many antispam filters will right away classify such an email as spam. No, that’s not true, UNLESS the antispam filter resides as a local software in the client's software as a plugin to the email client, which would of course detect the "attached file" even its not technically an attached

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

Dnia 12.02.2024 o godz. 01:36:09 Benny Pedersen via mailop pisze: > if spf should be pr email addresses, thay could add ipv6 pr sender > email :=) > > and have ipv4 with nullMX or simply remove ipv4 in mx, will it ever > happen ? Yeah, use only IPv6 for sending mail and cut off deliverability to

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

Dnia 10.02.2024 o godz. 05:02:12 Sebastian Nielsen via mailop pisze: > Disadvantages --> Every email will look like an empty email containing a > attachment that you have to click to open. Many antispam filters will right away classify such an email as spam. > Also, that’s how forwarding ALWAYS

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

entionally or by negligect. Sender bears ALL responsibility.Best regards Sebastian Nielsen Originalmeddelande Från: Slavko via mailop Datum: 2024-02-11 22:19 (GMT+01:00) Till: 'Mailing List' Ämne: Re: [mailop] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead? Dňa 11. februára 2024 19:06:31 UTC

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

Sebastian Nielsen via mailop skrev den 2024-02-11 18:33: It’s a matter of a simple configuration. checked spf for big domains: gmail.com 328,960 individual IPv4 addresses outlook.com 506,999 individual IPv4 addresses (65.55.238.128/26 listed twice in spf) hotmail.com 148,087 individual IPv4

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

Am 11.02.2024 um 18:40 schrieb Sebastian Nielsen via mailop : >> because SPF is too easy to forge.) Wrong. When a shared space is used, its up to that particular space, to enforce so customers cannot use other customer’s email addresses. In the same way you cannot, and should not be able to

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

On Sun, 11 Feb 2024, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote: because SPF is too easy to forge.) Wrong. When a shared space is used, its up to that particular space, to enforce so customers cannot use other customer’s email addresses. Since some of these shared spaces have demonstrated that

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

Dňa 11. februára 2024 19:06:31 UTC používateľ Sebastian Nielsen via mailop napísal: >>>On my site, users can use only own address/aliases, but i can use any >>>(including any domain)... > >Of course since you are administrator. Nothing strange with that. It was not meant as self-presentation,

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

>>And how you can know if site enforces that? And i don't mean guess, nor >>believe, but really **know** with particular message? Since you on your domain are in control of SPF, you of course choose a provider you **know** enforces that. So you simply choose a provider who you trust enforces

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

Dňa 11. februára 2024 17:33:30 UTC používateľ Sebastian Nielsen via mailop napísal: >>> because SPF is too easy to forge.) >Wrong. When a shared space is used, its up to that particular space, to >enforce so customers cannot use other customer’s email addresses. And how you can know if site

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

>> because SPF is too easy to forge.) Wrong. When a shared space is used, its up to that particular space, to enforce so customers cannot use other customer’s email addresses. In the same way you cannot, and should not be able to use someu...@hotmail.com

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

On 09.02.2024 at 18:22 schrieb Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 9:56 AM Gellner, Oliver via mailop mailto:mailop@mailop.org>> wrote: While I'm no advocate on external email forwarding, SPF does not perform a good job on identifying emails regardless of forwarding. Most

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

Good morning everyone, On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:37 +0900, Byunghee HWANG (황병희) via mailop wrote: > Hellow Jarland, > > 2-07 at 20:51 -0600, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote: > > (...) > > Is it time to throw in the towel on email forwarding? Nearly 100% > > of > > users who forward email do so

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

Hello Sebastian, On 10.02.24 05:02, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote: just because SPF and DMARC are so badly designed that they can't handle it doesnt make it "forging" anything. It isn't badly designed. Forwarding a email, is the equvalient of, when you receive a signed envelope from me

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

John Levine via mailop skrev den 2024-02-10 05:25: PS: Perhaps this list needs a FAQ of Well Known Bad Ideas so we can stop having this argument over and over. or make mailman patch that stops mailman from breaking dkim ___ mailop mailing list

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

John Levine via mailop skrev den 2024-02-10 05:22: It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: just because SPF and DMARC are so badly designed that they can't handle it doesnt make it "forging" anything. It isn't badly designed. Forwarding a email, is the equvalient of, when you

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

Sebastian Nielsen via mailop skrev den 2024-02-10 05:11: And also as a side note, this list server (mailop) also does sender rewriting to From: mailop@mailop.org to prevent SPF and DMARC from tripping on list mail. So its obvious it’s the right way to do it. Same have the list "Exim-Users"

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

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: Outlook supports that and knowing about it is a question of training. I'd like to suggest that understanding of email is declining in the general population. "Training" is a big ask when the grasp of the basics is mostly missing. -- Andre

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

It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: >And also as a side note, this list server (mailop) also does sender rewriting >to From: mailop@mailop.org to prevent SPF and >DMARC from tripping on list mail. Yes, we know. DMARC has been screwing up mailing lists for a decade now. >So its

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

It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: >>>just because SPF and DMARC are so badly designed that they can't handle it >>>doesnt make it "forging" anything. > >It isn't badly designed. >Forwarding a email, is the equvalient of, when you receive a signed envelope >from me containing a

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

Från: John Levine via mailop Skickat: den 10 februari 2024 04:35 Till: mailop@mailop.org Kopia: sebast...@sebbe.eu Ämne: Re: [mailop] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead? It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: >Or people could stop forwarding emails in idiotic ways, because when

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

>>just because SPF and DMARC are so badly designed that they can't handle it >>doesnt make it "forging" anything. It isn't badly designed. Forwarding a email, is the equvalient of, when you receive a signed envelope from me containing a letter, you forge my signature on the new envelope. That

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

It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said: >Or people could stop forwarding emails in idiotic ways, because when you >forward an email, you are actually forging the >original sender. Aw, come on. People have been forwarding mail for 40 years, and just because SPF and DMARC are so badly

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

y both the container AND the forwarded email against the original source. -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Marco Moock via mailop Skickat: den 9 februari 2024 17:11 Till: mailop@mailop.org Kopia: Scott Mutter Ämne: Re: [mailop] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead? Am 09.02.2024 um 08:50:52 Uhr

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

Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 18:06:41 Slavko via mailop pisze: > Hmm, and are you sure that regular users know what S/MIME is and > are able to reliable distinguish email with and without it? I don't think > so... While they are probably not capable of signing S/MIME mail (which requires getting your

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

On 9 February 2024 17:17:47 Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: This is why we can't have nice things. I disagree. The continual chase of money over everything - ethics, morals, decency included - is why we can't have nice things. It's one thing for someone to run a technical operation to

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

Am 09.02.2024 um 18:06:41 Uhr schrieb Slavko via mailop: > Hmm, and are you sure that regular users know what S/MIME is and > are able to reliable distinguish email with and without it? I don't > think so... Outlook supports that and knowing about it is a question of training. At our university,

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

Dňa 9. februára 2024 16:06:36 UTC používateľ Marco Moock via mailop napísal: >A good solution for phishing is S/MIME. Sadly, the adoption is very low. >If all banks, online shops, government would use that, users could >simply check the sender and forging messages would be much, much harder.

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?

Am 09.02.2024 um 08:50:52 Uhr schrieb Scott Mutter via mailop: > This is part of the issue I have with all of these band-aid solutions > when it comes to "fixing" the spam problem with email. You're going > to continue to have these issues with email until people realize that > they are going to

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

On 09.02.2024 at 15:51 Scott Mutter via mailop wrote: > On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 12:20 PM Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop > wrote: >> Spammers forging eMail accounts is the primary reason SPF and DKIM >> are so prevalent these days. >> I believe the day will come when it will be

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

On 2024-02-08 22:11, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: Am Thu, 8 Feb 2024 10:46:51 -0800 schrieb Michael Peddemors via mailop : The only way this will stop, is when the network operators are forced to be accountable for outbound traffic dnsbl exists and some lists (e.g. uceprotect L3) entirely

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] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead?

Hello, On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 07:00:34AM +0100, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > Am Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:10:57 + > schrieb Andy Smith via mailop : > > > Last month there was a complaint on the NANOG (North American > > Network Operator's Group) that changing the subject line of an email > >

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

Am 09.02.2024 schrieb Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop : > Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 07:13:31 Marco Moock via mailop pisze: > > S/MIME exists and I really don't understand why banks and online > > shops don't consequently use it. > > I must say that my bank is and always was using it. Same for my phone

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

Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 07:13:31 Marco Moock via mailop pisze: > S/MIME exists and I really don't understand why banks and online shops > don't consequently use it. I must say that my bank is and always was using it. Same for my phone provider. -- Regards, Jaroslaw Rafa r...@rafa.eu.org --

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

Philip Paeps via mailop skrev den 2024-02-09 10:56: You are not wrong. +1, maybe #metoo But you should treat ARC signatures in exactly the same way you treat DKIM signatures no not at all unless world like to step on own foots : as one signal. what ever this means Blindly trusting

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

Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 13:03:28 Philip Paeps via mailop pisze: > > Most people don't actually use email anymore. Email is for > marketing and receipts. Yeah, that's probably the main reason why they can live with such problematic service like Gmail. I have heard numerous times from Gmail

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

Dnia 9.02.2024 o godz. 06:58:40 Marco Moock via mailop pisze: > Not possible if some receivers require SPF, like Google for bulk > senders. > One possibility is to add ?all instead of -all. That makes it possible > that sites that check SPF and reject on -, but accept no SPF, will > accept the

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

Am 09.02.2024 schrieb Julian Bradfield via mailop : > On 2024-02-09, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > > I don't know if any MTA out there supports [DKIM] directly or > > supports Milter. > > Exim supports it, even in the rather old version in Debian 10 that I > use. My sentence was wrong, I

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

Am 09.02.2024 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop : > It was noted that not using DKIM can be used for preventing of > forwarding because of legal requirements. A rather bad solution for that because it depends on the checks of the receiver of the forwarded message.

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

On 2024-02-09 15:50:36 (+0800), Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote: But to get circle back at email forwarding and Gmail issues, there is one point that bothers me with ARC and I'd like that someone could tell me that I'm wrong (with valid arguments, of course). ARC tells the receiver party

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

On 2024-02-09, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: > I don't know if any MTA out there supports [DKIM] directly or supports > Milter. Exim supports it, even in the rather old version in Debian 10 that I use. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org

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

On 08.02.24 21:51, Archange via mailop wrote: Sorry if I wasn’t clear, I did not meant alignment when I wrote “require”. Just that they are implemented and passing. But indeed I am not sure of the value in SPF passing without alignment though (in a context of DMARC and DKIM working — outside

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

On 09/02/2024 08:13, Marco Moock via mailop wrote: S/MIME exists and I really don't understand why banks and online shops don't consequently use it. I'd guess it's because until recently, there were way bigger fish to fry. Now attention has been turned back towards it, the CA/B Forum S/MIME

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

On 08/02/2024 20:23, Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop wrote: Are there any particular DKIM/ARC mangles you've seen that come to mind for you that are particularly noteable? =D The few we've seen were forwarded from Microsoft or GSuite to some gateway that broke both signatures (but

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

On 09/02/2024 04:17, Andre van Eyssen via mailop wrote: The bulk of problematic email now -- I see phishing as the concern rather than spam that gets easily tagged -- comes with valid SPF and is signed with DKIM. Technical solutions just don't work these days [...] That's the joy of

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

I agree with Slavko here. Uceprotect must not be used to block spammers as it wrongly list entire block that includes legitimate sender in it, for the sole purpose that some spammers are in that block. But to get circle back at email forwarding and Gmail issues, there is one point that bothers me

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

Dňa 9. februára 2024 6:11:29 UTC používateľ Marco Moock via mailop napísal: >dnsbl exists and some lists (e.g. uceprotect L3) entirely list ISPs >that have a huge amount of spammers in their network. >The more servers that block those ISPs, the less customers will use >them for mail. No, that

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

Am Fri, 09 Feb 2024 13:17:48 +1100 (AEDT) schrieb Andre van Eyssen via mailop : > The bulk of problematic email now -- I see phishing as the concern > rather than spam that gets easily tagged -- comes with valid SPF and > is signed with DKIM. S/MIME exists and I really don't understand why banks

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

Am Thu, 8 Feb 2024 10:46:51 -0800 schrieb Michael Peddemors via mailop : > The only way this will stop, is when the network operators are forced > to be accountable for outbound traffic dnsbl exists and some lists (e.g. uceprotect L3) entirely list ISPs that have a huge amount of spammers in

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

Am Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:20:50 -0800 schrieb "Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop" : > > 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] Is forwarding to Gmail basically dead?

Am Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:10:57 + schrieb Andy Smith via mailop : > Last month there was a complaint on the NANOG (North American > Network Operator's Group) that changing the subject line of an email > mid-thread disrupted the way emails are grouped, the implication > being that the way gmail

  1   2   >