Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kurt Buff
gt;>> Gmail clients earlier this week because about 80 gmail servers are >>>>> blacklisted by spamcop.  But non gmail traffic gets in fine. >>>>> >>>>> -Bill >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Kennedy, Jim >>>>> >>>&g

RE: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kennedy, Jim
Imnsho, Spamcop is right. But I still don't use them. -Original Message- From: Roger Wright [mailto:rhw...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 3:36 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: RBL issues Whether right or wrong, this is still a good reason to not rely o

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Roger Wright
4.4.2.2 don't >> >>>> work. >> >>>> But that should actually allow all traffic, so forget that I guess. >> >>>> >> >>>> By everything do you mean EVERYTHING?  I was seeing the same NDRs for >> >>>> many &g

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Bill Songstad
ebruary 11, 2011 3:22 PM > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: RBL issues > > > > If only gmail is being blocked, I blame spamcop. If others are being > blocked as well, I'm stumped. I'd start with looking at DNS. It could be > that your local DNS is gi

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Andrew S. Baker
acks. So that test is a red > herring > >>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't > use > >>> Vipre. > >>> > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: S Powell [mailto:powe.

RE: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kennedy, Jim
PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: RBL issues If only gmail is being blocked, I blame spamcop. If others are being blocked as well, I'm stumped. I'd start with looking at DNS. It could be that your local DNS is giving responses that vipre is interpreting as "listed&quo

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kurt Buff
e: >>>> >>>> Trying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A record will not work, it >>>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring >>>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't use >>>>

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Bill Songstad
gt;> Gmail clients earlier this week because about 80 gmail servers are > >>>> blacklisted by spamcop. But non gmail traffic gets in fine. > >>>> > >>>> -Bill > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Kennedy, Jim

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread S Powell
spamcop.  But non gmail traffic gets in fine. >>>> >>>> -Bill >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Kennedy, Jim >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Trying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A rec

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kurt Buff
e: >>>> >>>> Trying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A record will not work, it >>>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring >>>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't use >>

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread S Powell
;> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Kennedy, Jim >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Trying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A record will not work, it >>>>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring &g

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Roger Wright
;> wrote: >>>> >>>> Trying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A record will not work, it >>>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring >>>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we d

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread S Powell
g zones  to an A record will not work, it >>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring >>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't use >>> Vipre. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message-

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread S Powell
e that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't use >>> Vipre. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: S Powell [mailto:powe...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:37 AM >>> To: NT System Admin Issu

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Jonathan Link
ying to resolve the spamhaus.org zones  to an A record will not work, it >>> is a defensive measure against DoS attacks. So that test is a red herring >>> and you can ignore that. Beyond that I have nothing to add, we don't use >>> Vipre. >>> >>>

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kurt Buff
o add, we don't use >> Vipre. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: S Powell [mailto:powe...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:37 AM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: RBL issues >> >> After restarting

Re: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Bill Songstad
.com] > Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:37 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RBL issues > > After restarting exchange yesterday, and installing updates; Vipre has > been blocking everything. This it the message--> > > "The error that the other server retu

RE: RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread Kennedy, Jim
:powe...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:37 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RBL issues After restarting exchange yesterday, and installing updates; Vipre has been blocking everything. This it the message--> "The error that the other server returned was: 550 550 5.7.1 Mes

RBL issues

2011-02-11 Thread S Powell
After restarting exchange yesterday, and installing updates; Vipre has been blocking everything. This it the message--> "The error that the other server returned was: 550 550 5.7.1 Message rejected because of RBL policy (state 13)." okay. we had the RBL in place before, and I didn't change anyth

Re: SORBS.NET - email RBL issues

2010-10-07 Thread Andrew S. Baker
eeSM.com/AndrewBaker> *Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...* * * On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Steven M. Caesare wrote: > Thanks for the heads up.. > > > > -sc > > > > *Sent:* Thursday, October 07, 2010 9:28 AM > *Subject:* SORBS.NET - emai

SORBS.NET - email RBL issues

2010-10-07 Thread Andrew S. Baker
https://isc.sans.edu/diary.html?storyid=9685 If you're using SORBS.NET for email, be advised: they're having issues this morning... :) *ASB *(My XeeSM Profile) *Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...* * * ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T