Re: [mailop] Why is mail forwarding such a mess?
m...@dorfdsl.de said: > Bypassing spam checking would make spammers use exactly that way to send > spam. Sorry I wasn't clear enough. My "handshke to set things up" was meant to keep out spammers. The idea was that the final receiving MTA would know that it was expecting forwarded mail for user@domain from a set of IP addresses. I was picturing something like: user goes to final MTA and says I want you to accept forwarded mail for me from example.com then he goes to example.com and says "please forward my mail to m...@final.com" example.com would then contact final.com and say "OK if I forward me's mail to you?" If yes, then example.com says "Here are the IP addresses I use for forwarding" -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Why is mail forwarding such a mess?
I expect that there would be a protocol to handle it. I can't be the only one who has thought of this. After a handshke to set things up, the sender adds a forwarding header and the receiver verifies that a forwarded message is coming from an allowed IP Address then bypasses spam checking for that message. (but not phish/malware checking???) Is there a technical reason why something like that doesn't work? Or some economic/policical reason why too many key players aren't interested? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Displaying logos
Robert L Mathews said: > I hope nobody creates MUA features that show non-BIMI logos in the same space > as BIMI logos (or that make it difficult for users to notice the difference, > such as a tiny padlock superimposed on it sometimes). Superimposing something to indicate validity won't work. The bad guys can just use a "logo" with that mark already installed. It might work to put a gold border around checked logos and a black/red dashed line around non-validated logos. Another possibility would be to differentiate by size, shape, or location. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] salesforce phishing emails
Giovanni Bechis said: > I maintain an ESP rbl that includes SalesForce bad customers, How well does that work? This month, I have 6 copies of the same crap: After reviewing your company's profile, we believe that your knowledge and experience will be beneficial to the projects that ARAMCO is working on in this 2023 and 2024 session Another one in Sep. All from Salesforce. All different vendors. All sent to an address that hasn't sent anything for 2 years but was/is on lots of spammer lists. Just in case anybody isn't sure, I don't have a company and I don't know anything about the oil business. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Legit-looking mail to the wrong address with no unsubscribe
> To receive first an email requesting you to confirm your address, only to > next receive another email from them with the actual information? That seems > over-engineered... How often is it only one message? I typically get 3, often 4 sometimes even 5: we got your order we shipped it it was delivered how did you like it? please please please give us a good rating They are often full of bloat, pages of HTML only and lots of crappy advertising. Even if there was an unsubscribe/error link, it would be hard to find. How many people are selling make-more-money by sending lots of bloated email? > Mantra: always provide a valid reply-to method on emails which preferably > directs to a customer service team capable of resolving the problem. It can > sometimes come in very useful. I wonder how often that type of address would get added to a spammer's list? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Industry standards
> That's the industry standard: block after abuse. Instead, t-online.de uses > block-and-maybe-unblock-after-contact. This is not how email is supposed to > work. I thought the standard was your server, your rules. It's fine to whine and rant here, but that isn't going to change anything. Fighting spam is expensive. Receivers have to filter out the crap. Senders have to get through the filters. Does anybody have any suggestions for how a help small sites? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud
ra...@usebouncer.com said: > - marketing teams coming to us from Marketing SaaSs, who, during customer > onboarding, notice that the quality of email lists is low and send their > customers to us to clean it first. My alarm bells went off on one of your first messages when you said little guys need to spam because otherwise they couldn't compete with the big guys. Many marketing people just don't get it when it comes to spam. They can always come up with some way to rationalize that their spam isn't spam. I wonder if it is genetic. Vernon Schryver has a wonderful list: Spam is That Which We Don't Do https://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/that-which-we-dont.html There is a wide range of spam -- from crooks and Viagra to people who don't know better. There are also lots of people who do know better, but try to push the limits a bit, or push too hard and try to talk their way out of it. There is also a wide range of email marketing consultants. Some sell lists and spamming services. Some will encourage confirmed opt-in. Some would be happy to hire somebody else to do the dirty work of cleaning their lists. --- > - if you don't want us to verify your email addresses - please let us know > and we will consider them as blocked (no need even to spend your time on > feeding the firewall or block list), That's opt-out. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] SMTP noise from *.bouncer.cloud
Radek Kaczynski said: > That's interesting indeed - we haven't implemented SMTP VRFY as it is very > uncommon. > However, I truly think that it would be great to use VRFY instead of "broken > SMTP trick". > I would be more than happy to pay to use it - or give back to the community > or charity. If you want people to take you seriously, I suggest you put your energy into figuring out how to convince people that your customers are not spammers. I have no idea how you could do that. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] HR 8160 and SB 4409: The "You're not allowed to run political campaign email through your spam filter" act
Is there any hard data? This seems like thesis bait. I'd expect there to be a steady trickle of papers or reports with good data on political spam. Where are they? I hear lots of complaints by conservatives/Republicans that the spam filters are biased against them. If they send more spam, I'd expect more of their mail to get blocked. But that's because they are sending spam, not because the filters are biased. I'd really like to see hard data to back that up or refute it. How about a trial with the house and senate mail systems? :) -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] WTaF? I just got spammed BY Active Campaign
> so I typically wouldn't even wax poetic about it here on Mailop, I think ESPs and ISPs should know better and be setting a good example. Publicity here may encourage others not to do the same thing. How did a guy like that get past HR? If you were running HR, could you filter out people like that? How many places will post this thread above the water cooler? -- Who was the ISP that spammed every email address they could find in their mail logs? including people who were only in there because they had reported spam. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Ethics Complaint to Princeton (was: Privacy research spam apparently from a grad student at Princeton)
> Professor Jonathan Mayer A direct note may shortcut a few layers of bureaucracy. He has both a Ph.D. in computer science and a J.D. from Stanford. https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/people/jonathan-mayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Mayer I don't know him personally, but I think of him as a good-guy. I started paying attention when he did great work on phone metadata back in the Snowden days. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] Reporting spam
Brandon Long said: > If you received say... a million ab...@gmail.com emails a day, how would you > handle that? What fraction is actually spam? What fraction is useful? What happened to ARF? Was it useful? Does anybody use it? (When I looked at it, many years ago, it didn't seem to fit what I was trying to report.) How much would it help if there was a machine readable format for spam reports? What would you want in such a report? Are comments like "sent to a spamtrap" or "harvested from usenet" or "repurposed from xxx" helpful? How often do you need more than just a copy of of the spam? For example, if the spammer rotates his server address, it may have moved between when I looked it up and when you look it up. Would it help to split spam reporting/processing/thinking/discussions into good and bad? Good being marketers trying too hard (or pick your excuse) and bad being crooks: 419, phishing, pills, ... -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] [E] Re: IP based reporting for Yahoo feedback loop gone?
Scott Mutter said: > If spam is sent from one of our servers - the IP address of one of our > servers - it's me you ultimately want to contact, not the owner of the IP > address. If you contact the owner of the IP address - they don't have root > access to the server - they will have to filter that report down to me, for > me to take action. And whether or not if that happens or if that happens in a > timely manner is anybody's guess. That's correct if you are white-hat. If you are black-hat, I want to contact the owner in hopes that you will become an ex-customer. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] [External] Re: Horrible week for email deliverability - Looking for help with RackSpace/Emailsrvr
> Is there any precedent on how fresh / recent the "established business > relationship" must be to cover sending largely superfluous email? Sure, simple. If it is superfluous, don't send it. > If it's been less than a year since I conducted business with the sender and > they have an unsubscribe link, I'm willing to overlook it. Did you subscribe? Or were you subscribed without consent? In my book, adding an unsubscribe link doesn't magically make junk mail legitimate. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] [FEEDBACK] whose address, was Approach to dealing with List Washing services, industry feedback..
Michael Peddemors: > Really wish there was a verifiable way to see that it was a 'Double Optin/ > COI' email.. Has anybody investigated that area? I think the recipient's ISP would have to get involved with the signup and unsubscribe process and keep track of which lists the user is signed up for. I'm thinking of something like send the please-confirm message to signup@, the ISP would ask the user, if yes, send back a confirming message. Maybe it should send back a cookie to be used as a header. I see potential problems with users unsubscribing manually rather than using the unsubscribe button so their ISP knows they are no longer subscribed. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
[mailop] COI and recipient's MTA
> What one recipient sees as spam another recipient not only wants, theyâve > actually gone through a COI process to confirm they want it. Has anybody investigated getting the recipient's MTA involved in the COI and unsubscribe dance? The idea is that if the recipient's MTA knew that the user was or wasn't signed up for a list it could do a better job of spam filtering. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Gmail marking email from me as spam
> Thank you, but your reply appears to be a reiteration of what is said > to be current practise. I don't see an answer to my question about > considering ip addresses individually. There are variations on that question. Suppose you get spam from an IP Address. Do you block the address, or continue to examine each message? If you block, do you block at the mail server or the firewall? Or maybe just block the sender. Suppose you block an IP Address. How long should that block remain in place? If the source is a legitimate mail system with a phished account, you want to unblock as soon as the spam stops. If the block is for a spam friendly ISP there is a good chance that spam will start again as soon as enough receivers have removed their blocks. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
Re: [mailop] Best Re-engagement Email
Damon said: > I have asked around and got a few opposing answers. Plain text vs. HTML, > images ok/images not-ok, Opt-out Link at top or bottom, send from > transactional IP vs. customer's 'regular' IP, CTA incentive for re-engaging > included or not. You skipped the most important part. Send mail people want. What do you mean by engaging and why would you be sending re-engaging email and why does it need an opt-out link? - My personal opinion. I am probably not one of your typical users. I prefer plain text. I like appropriate pictures and graphs. I don't consider logos to be appropriate. I really hate blinky bouncy crap. I'm a privacy nut. I don't want you tracking my mail reading. If you think I'm not engaging because your web-bugs aren't working, you could ask me if I still want to be on your list. If I decide I don't want to be on your list, I will unsubscribe. If "re-engage" means invite me to get back on your list or some other list, I'm probably going to be annoyed by that sort of email. An opt-out link doesn't make any sense since I already unsubscribed. (And I don't opt-out from things I didn't opt-in to.) -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
