Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread RW
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:01:21 +0100 > On 11.11.20 15:41, RW wrote: > >Note that without a DKIM pass, SPF is easily spoofed in TxRep. > > is it? how does that work then? It's implicit in the next bit. > >DKIM reputations are identified by a combination of header from > >address and signing

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2020-11-11 17:01: Martin Gregorie skrev den 2020-11-11 11:02: On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: On 11.11.20 15:41, RW wrote: Note that without a DKIM pass, SPF is easily spoofed in TxRep. is it? how does that work then? On 11.11.20 17:20,

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Benny Pedersen
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2020-11-11 17:01: Martin Gregorie skrev den 2020-11-11 11:02: > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: On 11.11.20 15:41, RW wrote: Note that without a DKIM pass, SPF is easily spoofed in TxRep. is it? how does that work then? signedby tracking in

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Martin Gregorie skrev den 2020-11-11 11:02: > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: > I suppose some may find it useful to datestamp entries with the last > time mail was sent to them and remove any addresses that haven't > been sent mail for 'x' days/weeks/months/years but I've never >

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread RW
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 11:14:05 +0100 Benny Pedersen wrote: > Martin Gregorie skrev den 2020-11-11 11:02: > > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: > > > I suppose some may find it useful to datestamp entries with the last > > time mail was sent to them and remove any addresses that

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Benny Pedersen
Martin Gregorie skrev den 2020-11-11 11:02: On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: I suppose some may find it useful to datestamp entries with the last time mail was sent to them and remove any addresses that haven't been sent mail for 'x' days/weeks/months/years but I've never needed

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Martin Gregorie
On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 09:52 +0100, Tobi wrote: > > If I only had a ready-made list of those important domains. > > If you filter for customer domains then maybe (depending the customer > domain) adding the customer domain to spf checks is worth a look too. > That's easy: keep a database of

Re: SPF_FAIL

2020-11-11 Thread Tobi
> If I only had a ready-made list of those important domains. If you filter for customer domains then maybe (depending the customer domain) adding the customer domain to spf checks is worth a look too. On 11/11/20 6:29 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote: > John Hardin wrote: >> >>> Moreover, after