On 5/2/19 3:11 PM, RW wrote:
>
> That just means it's a known source of email and not a zombie or IP
> address controlled by an outright spammer. The level of trust is
> described as 'none', that's a lower level than some freemail servers.
>
> The DKIM signing domain isn't listed at all on dkimw
On Thu, 2 May 2019 03:15:13 +
David Jones wrote:
> On 5/1/19 6:04 PM, RW wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 May 2019 10:39:08 -0700 (MST)
> > jandev wrote:
> >
> >> David,
> >>
> >> I tried to send the original email to the email address you
> >> requested. But your mail hoster blocks (554 5.7.1) my TLDs
On 5/1/19 10:15 PM, David Jones wrote:
> On 5/1/19 6:04 PM, RW wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 May 2019 10:39:08 -0700 (MST)
>> jandev wrote:
>>
>>> David,
>>>
>>> I tried to send the original email to the email address you
>>> requested. But your mail hoster blocks (554 5.7.1) my TLDs.
>>
>> I doesn't really
Likely but the cves have been closed and this was research only. It will
be unlikely in the wild as people using pgp and smime will be high
patches. To me, this will be a waste of cycles.
On Thu, May 2, 2019, 03:26 Brent Clark wrote:
> Good day Guys
>
> Just thought, and wondered, based on the
Good day Guys
Just thought, and wondered, based on the following,
https://thehackernews.com/2019/04/email-signature-spoofing.html
Is there not something that can we done, checked and caught at
Spamassasin level?
Much like there is SPF, DKIM etc checks, is there not something to check
for s
