On 1/18/23 16:34, John Covici via mailop wrote:
Thanks for that -- for some reason, an spf lookup site which I have used says no spf record, are you seeing for covici.com or ccs.covici.com ?
covici.com and ccs.covici.com spf record are still invalid: covici.com descriptive text "/v=spf1 a include:covici-com.spf-a.smtp25.com include:covici-com.spf-b.smtp25.com include:covici-com.spf-c.smtp25.com a:ccs.covici.com a:debian-2.covici.com -all/" ccs.covici.com descriptive text "/v=spf1 a include:covici-com.spf-a.smtp25.com include:covici-com.spf-b.smtp25.com include:covici-com.spf-c.smtp25.com a:ccs.covici.com a:debian-2.covici.com -all/" spf records should not start nor end with "/". Giovanni
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:55:05 -0500, Bill Cole via mailop wrote:On 2023-01-18 at 05:08:00 UTC-0500 (Wed, 18 Jan 2023 05:08:00 -0500) John Covici via mailop <[email protected]> is rumored to have said: [...]Source Received: by mail-tester.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 567CCA0BC0; Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:14 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mail-tester.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No/0.3/5.0 X-Spam-Test-Scores: KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.32,SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 X-Spam-Last-External-IP: 166.84.7.93 X-Spam-Last-External-HELO: covici.com X-Spam-Last-External-rDNS: debian-2.covici.com X-Spam-Date-of-Scan: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 09:59:14 +0100 X-Spam-Report: * 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was * blocked. See * http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block * for more information. * [URIs: covici.com] * 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record * 0.0 SPF_NONE SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record * 0.3 KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS Relay HELO differs from its IP's reverse DNS ***** I don't understand this one, I have rdns pointers on ccs.covici.com and debian-2.covici.com .Those are the names of rules in the SpamAssassin filter that mail-tester.com unfortunately purports to demonstrate. They are using an obsolete version of SA with (apparently) local rule adjustments and they have chronically m isreported the sign of SA scores, confusing users. As someone who fields SpamAssassin bug reports, I despise them. KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS means that one of the trustworthy set of Received headers shows a handoff from a machine that identified itself (in the EHLO or HELO step of the transaction) with a name that did not match the name that the connecting IP's PTR record points to, which does resolve back to the connecting IP. This is a minor issue, and while it is more common in spam, the correlation is weak enough to earn a fairly low score for that rule. In the current full SA ruleset it is scored at 0.001: basically meaningless. [...]OK, even without dkim and marc, why is gmail rejecting?Only GMail can tell you for sure, if even they can. Give it some time with your fixed SPF. That *may* be adequate, but Google changes can take time. -- Bill Cole [email protected] or [email protected] (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses) Not Currently Available For Hire _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
