1. ISPs are not accurately, clearly and fairly specifying RDNS entries.
They need to do a better job of this, but have little motivation to do this.
Well - I see your point and admit that there will be a painful time of
adjustment.
But frankly, providers like yours will adopt their policies,
Why not just require everyone in the world to show the secret sign
before having their E-mail accepted? Sarcasm obviously, but reverse DNS
entries are not necessary for E-mail to function properly, and in many
cases won't even match the domain given in HELO...so why require it?
This also
Is there a way to turn off Declude Queue?
Yes, but it's kind of like turning off your car engine -- you can do it,
but can't do much of anything else until you turn it back on.
Somehow, it seems that Declude is thinking there is a problem and is putting
all Q into the overflow file. However,
Hi Doug,
If you look for somethink like this, maybe give a try to SpamChk an external
test for Declude Junkmail.
SpamChk will accumulate the weight for every instance of a certain keyword.
You can define also a max. number of how many instances should be counted,
and the weight for keywords
That would be true if all of the servers using those IP addresses were 100%
trustworthy, but that's impossible. Servers are compromised all the time.
The people running them can make mistakes, creating open proxies or open
relays, or they can be bribed to allow a spammer access. Very few spam
I'm sure it's not a 100% fix - but, if I can block spam that's originating
from the Spammer's easiest and preferred targets (known open relays run by
ignorant mail admins, infected zombie machines, etc.), then a lot has been
won. Those machine's are much less likely to show up with correct SPF
Todd, thanks for the insight.
Jason,
Many ISPs refuse (for one reason or another) to delegate RDNS.
Instead of delegating the RDNS to you, would they make the changes for you?
Say, give them a list of your IPs and what you would like the RDNS to be?
I guess I'm very fortunate to have worked
Agreed. However, this is happening to us. (a la AOL policies and others to
follow) and we have to adapt.
As I pointed out, I think the value of RDNS (regardless of it not stopping
or slowing down spam) is that it identifies the operator of an IP address
more clearly than the large netblock
Probably, but if so, they're not doing their
job. We need an organization that is less ivory tower and more proactive
in enforcing standards and best practices.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: Pete
McNeil
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:38 PM
Title: Message
My
alter ego is a salesperson for a computer center (my boss owns the computer
center and the ISP--I do sales for one and network admin for the other).
At least once a week, often more, I get a call supposedly from a hearing
impaired person using a relay operator. This person
I have been told many times that MPower will create an RDNS entry, but
only the using the standard format for all MPower RDNS entries (which is
obviously inaccurate).
I would love to have it changed to reflect our company name. Can you
forward the name of your contact or have them contact me?
In the meantime, why not relay your outbound mail through your ISP?
Obviously you have never relayed your outbound mail through an ISP! If
you had, you would not suggest that course of action. :)
Currently, I have no problems. I hope that I can keep it this way!
Todd Holt
Xidix Technologies,
Jason,
I think I have been convinced to push this issue with MPower. First I
hope that John's contact can help me out, but I will also forward the
RFC to them.
Thanks for the debate! :)
Todd Holt
Xidix Technologies, Inc
Las Vegas, NV USA
www.xidix.com
702.319.4349
-Original
Title: Message
This is a common perception... and one that I share to some extent. None
the less, it's not an easy problem. The network runs on consensus - and that is
nearly impossible to build and enforce. Ultimately, we hope, what works will win
out and become recognized as a standard.
AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in
Declude.
This is true.
So what's the whining all about?
1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to.
2. The policy changes regularly.
3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable.
4. They are pointing
Title: Message
Hi Pete,
I do agree with you on all of the problems you
present in regards to a governing body that can enforce it's will.
However, I think we're already there to some degree with the fact that companies
like AOL can enforce policies locally that impact others and force them
For those wondering what we are talking about:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1912.html
RFC 1912 - Common DNS Operational and Configuration Errors
Please consider RFC1912 section 2.1 that doesn't *require* that the reverse
DNS entries, but makes it clear that not having one is a use at your own
Good point, they should be more accessible. That would be my biggest
complaint with most black-lists.
As far as policies - as long as their policy is simply to follow RFCs (or
universally agreed recommendations, e.g. no open relays/proxies), I don't
see any obligation on their end to try to put
Darin wrote:
I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce
standards that are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on
customer base) it's the best chance we have.
The IETF or other independent body will not be able to enforce any
standards, they can make
Hi Kevin,
I'm not against AOL for doing this, as you would see from following the
thread. What I intended to convey is that we need a lot more standards and
enforcement of them (e.g. blacklists, dial up lists, port 25 blocking for
dynamic addresses, etc.), as well as the all-important
Thank you all for your suggestions..
Alex V.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Any suggestions on some tests ??
If you have
Matthew:
You do not need an abuse or postmaster account for mail to function
properly. You do not need to accept Null sender to have email function
properly. But the mail system on the Internet only works because of
cooperative interoperability. The RFCs are the standards out there and it
Okay, we've been using Declude quite successfully for some time, and
we're finally trying to clean up all the original mistakes and misuses
and misconfigurations. :)
I'm looking for suggestions on how others handle some situations and
setup.
Currently we use a WORDFILTER to delete messages
Hi Jeff,
We've taken the stance that no legitimate email should ever be deleted. So,
our implementation does not hold or delete any mail. Instead, we simply
prepend the title of detected spam with 'SPAM[%tests failed%]' and,
depending on the customer's desires, either pass the message on or
We have a simple client app that they can run in the system tray of their
desktop to create new email aliases with a note for each subscription.
Care to share the app? It sounds like a really cool idea for my own use (I
don't know I want my users going crazy creating aliases.)
- Andy
---
Hello, Jeff,
In our setup we use a HOLD weight and a DELETE weight.
-
global.cfg
WEIGHTRANGE-10+ weightrange x x 10 35
WEIGHT-DELETE weight x x 36 0
-
-
$default$.junkmail
WEIGHTRANGE-10+ HOLD
WEIGHT-DELETE DELETE
-
Our HOLD weight is meant to catch as much spam as possible and catch as
Hello, All,
Is there anyone on this list besides Kami who makes their Declude JunkMail
files publically viewable as he does?
Just curious. I'm always looking for new ideas.
Thanks, Much!
Dan Geiser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Sign
I have some thing in the works.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Geiser
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 3:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an
(automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header
(which
are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL
as
an implicated party often (if ever).
I am interpreting this statement as you
Todd:
Oh I often see email that has a mail from of [EMAIL PROTECTED] - which means
nothing. In most cases, these are bogus addresses. I can generate tons of
spam that appears to come from YOUR email address - even though you are not
a spammer.
What counts is, whether the mail was actually sent
Scott,
I've got a little problem here, all of a sudden (as of this morning) the
declude overflow directory is flooded with mail waiting to be delivered.
1:47 AM - 2:04 AM not moving at all so I copied them from overflow spool
to another directory.
Big gap until 3:11 PM - mail is coming in
BTW, this is not on a mail server some where around Florida, is it?
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 5:35 PM
Oh geez Fritz, Scott is going to pull his hair out on this one, as he and I
just spent the day figuring out the same type of problem on a server I am
working on.
Quadripple check the DNS servers. Change to a known good other one. That
what it turned out to be in my case. Some times they returned
I've got a little problem here, all of a sudden (as of this morning) the
declude overflow directory is flooded with mail waiting to be delivered.
This will happen if E-mail isn't being scanned/delivered as fast as it is
coming in. In most cases, it is a DNS issue.
Currently 30,927 in the
Hi John,
Ok, you got me...why ask about Florida?
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: John Tolmachoff (Lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Overflow Directory
BTW, this is not on a mail server some
Hi Andy,
Sure, I'll need to package it for you, though, as the client depends on a
small amount of server-side ASP.NET/SQL 2000. We have SQL on our mail
servers, so it's designed for that configuration. The client only needs
internet connectivity.
I'm leaving tomorrow for the Holidays, but
John,
Nope, I'm in snowy western Pennsylvania. Sprint ATT backbone(s).
My DNS servers seem to be resolving everything OK, no warnings in the DJM
log file, same DNS server for Imail DNS and my ip4r tests.
The network guys and a consultant have been working on getting BGP up
between the two
Hi,
I had a similar problem a while back. There is a known and internally
documented bug that goes back several versions in IMail.
Under some circumstances, IMail loses the ability to resolve ANY dns entries
if you follow their suggestion and enter more than one IP address in the DNS
box
Dave, that is exactly how I over came the problem I had, set up MS DNS on
the same server as Imail in cache only mode and only for Imail and Declude.
BTW, that is also a suggestion to avoid DNS server problems, as Declude will
only use the first server listed in Imail anyways. This way, by having
39 matches
Mail list logo
