Re: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

On 11/04/2018, 22:57, "Alex" wrote: > The envelope sender is > 3ue3owhmjamkzhabyuuhahsbe.qpzhvnthps.jvtytilzadlzalyu@trix.bounces.google.com > and the SPF-relevant relay IP is 209.85.223.199, so SPF passes. That's good > enough for

Re: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

Hi, >> Hi, this message seems suspicious to me (appears to be some type of >> survey), but I don't understand how it was whitelisted when google.com >> is not listed among def_whitelist_from_dkim (or at least shouldn't be) > > Note that google.com has historically been reserved for Google

Re: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

On 11 Apr 2018, at 15:28 (-0400), Alex wrote: Hi, this message seems suspicious to me (appears to be some type of survey), but I don't understand how it was whitelisted when google.com is not listed among def_whitelist_from_dkim (or at least shouldn't be) Note that google.com has historically

Re: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

Alex skrev den 2018-04-11 21:28: Hi, this message seems suspicious to me (appears to be some type of survey), but I don't understand how it was whitelisted when google.com is not listed among def_whitelist_from_dkim (or at least shouldn't be) https://pastebin.com/raw/h1370F1F I'd appreciate

Re: FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

On 04/11/2018 02:28 PM, Alex wrote: Hi, this message seems suspicious to me (appears to be some type of survey), but I don't understand how it was whitelisted when google.com is not listed among def_whitelist_from_dkim (or at least shouldn't be) https://pastebin.com/raw/h1370F1F I'd appreciate

FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD and USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL

Hi, this message seems suspicious to me (appears to be some type of survey), but I don't understand how it was whitelisted when google.com is not listed among def_whitelist_from_dkim (or at least shouldn't be) https://pastebin.com/raw/h1370F1F I'd appreciate any clarification on what's going on