This email was received and is very much spam, (February 77% off, Viagra
HTML spam), and was sent to this user FROM this user (which they
obviously did not spam themselves). What can I do to make the score
higher than what it was scored, as well as why didn't the SPF fail? The
record for
At 11:02 27-02-2008, Russell Jones wrote:
This email was received and is very much spam, (February 77% off,
Viagra HTML spam), and was sent to this user FROM this user (which
they obviously did not spam themselves). What can I do to make the
score higher than what it was scored, as well as why
Forgot to put this address in CC. In case anyone is interested in
following the convo:
Original Message
Subject:
Re: No SPF_FAIL flag, why?
Date:
Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:27:52 -0600
From:
Russell Jones [EMAIL
At 11:27 27-02-2008, Russell Jones wrote:
That doesn't make sense. Maybe I am misunderstanding this. From openspf.org:
What does SPF actually DO?
Suppose a spammer forges a hotmail.com address and tries to spam you.
They connect from somewhere other than Hotmail.
When his message is sent,
That doesn't make sense. Maybe I am misunderstanding this. From openspf.org:
What does SPF actually DO?
Suppose a spammer forges a hotmail.com address and tries to spam you.
They connect from somewhere other than Hotmail.
When his message is sent, you see MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Matt wrote:
The MTA never really sees whats in the headers. It only adds to the
headers. When an SMTP connection first begins the connecting MTA says
helo this [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thats what SPF looks
at. The MTA then adds that as the return path to the headers.
It is completely accurate and copied and pasted from the message file
itself.
I am running Exim. What configuration should I be looking at on how to
block messages with return paths like that?
Dave Funk wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Matt wrote:
The MTA never really sees whats in the
