On 2022-09-15 at 18:16:43 UTC-0400 (15 Sep 2022 18:16:43 -0400)
John Levine via mailop
is rumored to have said:
While looking at my mail logs, I see a whole lot of connections from
this host. It does EHLO, then STARTTLS, then EHLO again, then
disconnects. My mail server has a lot of different
Moin,
on 15.09.22 15:37, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
[…]
The full blogpost can be read here:
https://cfenollosa.com/blog/after-self-hosting-my-email-for-twenty-three-years-i-have-thrown-in-the-towel-the-oligopoly-has-won.html
To get back to the original topic: In my opinion many of the
On Thu, 2022-09-15 at 14:44 -0700, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) via mailop
wrote:
>
> * Does anyone know of an OS packager that's choosing to build with gnutls
> instead of openssl. (It would simplify autoconf a lot to remove the
> gnutls support, as there are AC macros for openssl, but not for gtls).
Hi
On 9/15/22 23:44, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) via mailop wrote:
* Does anyone have an OS using openssl 3.0 as the default rather than the
1.1 branch, that we can test the mainline branch on? (We don't want
access to your OS, just...to know which it is).
Ubuntu 22.04 LTS uses OpenSSL 3. See also:
While looking at my mail logs, I see a whole lot of connections from
this host. It does EHLO, then STARTTLS, then EHLO again, then
disconnects. My mail server has a lot of different names and I can see
that it is trying them all. Their host is at Amazon.
My guess is this is another lame student
On 15/09/2022 22:51, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
I already described what I think is best. Only *mark* messages as spam and
let the users decide if they want *themselves* filter the marked messages
into the spam folder. Don't *preconfigure* such filtering for them.
OK. I'm sorry for
All,
I'm attempting to get a point release of OpenDKIM out that should include
ecc key support (it's been in our develop branch for a while).
In doing the cleanup, I also have had to modernize it to play nice with
modern versions of autoconf, and the code to detect openssl versions also
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 17:42:47 John Levine via mailop pisze:
>
> Speaking as a spammer, allow me to offer my deepest thanks for your help
> at tuning my techniques to evade your filters.
I knew that someone would bring up that argument ;)
--
Regards,
Jaroslaw Rafa
r...@rafa.eu.org
--
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 22:34:50 Paul Smith via mailop pisze:
>
> Arguing that "a rejection is better" makes sense *when the sender is human,
> technically competent and understands how email works*. Most senders don't
> fall into that category.
It's not me who argued that rejection is better.
It appears that Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>So basically, what would be interesting to have is both : land the email in
>the spam folder but notify the sender about if, maybe via an ARF report ?
Speaking as a spammer, allow me to offer my deepest thanks for
On 15/09/2022 21:30, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
folders. If it actually worked this way, spam folders wouldn't be any issue.
But this assumption failed: the reality is that 99% of users don't check
their spam folders at all, so directing a message to spam folder effectively
equals
On 9/15/22 2:51 PM, Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop wrote:
So basically, what would be interesting to have is both : land the email
in the spam folder but notify the sender about if, maybe via an ARF report ?
I think this would be a slippery slope and leak information, akin to
"your password is
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 22:51:29 Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop pisze:
> So basically, what would be interesting to have is both : land the email in
> the spam folder but notify the sender about if, maybe via an ARF report ?
> That way, the event organizer or the one applying for a job would be able
So basically, what would be interesting to have is both : land the email in
the spam folder but notify the sender about if, maybe via an ARF report ?
That way, the event organizer or the one applying for a job would be able
to notify the recipient about the email being in spam.
Le jeu. 15 sept.
I'd love to know the research on this... 99% seems a bit far fetched.
Homer Simpson once said, “Oh, people can come up with statistics to
prove anything, Kent. Forty per cent of all people know that.”
~MV
On 2022-09-15 4:30 p.m., Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
the reality is that 99% of
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 11:32:41 Jay Hennigan via mailop pisze:
>
> If recipients at least periodically scan the contents of the spam folder and
> mark wanted mail, this avoids the need for the sender to communicate
> out-of-band to deliver the original (and likely future) messages as would be
>
> Am 15.09.2022 um 16:43 schrieb Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop :
>
> Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 16:06:22 Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop pisze:
>> If I'm missing an email, I can simply check the Spam folder, which will be
>> faster (and less tedious) than reaching out to the sender for him to send
>>
>> The main issue is not really „cheap“. As I see it, as an SMB around the
>> world, you really only have two choices: MS365 or Google.
If you want all of the other stuff that Exchange provides, you're
stuck with Microsoft but if you just want mail, there are plenty of
other options.
Two that I
Interesting discussion. I use spam folders, and typically look at them
daily as far as scanning sender and subject.
One advantage of spam folders is that they can be used to train the
algorithm. If wanted mail is found and flagged as "Not Spam" then that
sender will be marked as safe and
"Google’s Gmail Verified Sender Pilot Program for political campaigns is up and
running, and political campaigns can now apply to be part of Google’s program
which allows political campaign email to bypass the spam filter and be
delivered directly to Gmail users’ inboxes, but only once unless
> On Sep 15, 2022, at 7:37 AM, Gellner, Oliver via mailop
> wrote:
>
>> https://cfenollosa.com/blog/after-self-hosting-my-email-for-twenty-three-years-i-have-thrown-in-the-towel-the-oligopoly-has-won.html
>
> To get back to the original topic: In my opinion many of the claims made in
> this
> I am not a lawyer and it's difficult to discuss laws in a different language,
> but according to the definitions of the Telecommunications Act, anyone who
> provides e-mail services to others is obliged to maintain the secrecy of
> telecommunications. For this reason, they may not evaluate
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 16:06:22 Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop pisze:
> If I'm missing an email, I can simply check the Spam folder, which will be
> faster (and less tedious) than reaching out to the sender for him to send
> another copy (hoping it wasn't an automated email, otherwise I'm good to
>
>
> I can second this
It's really interesting to (try) to follow all the discussions about spam
folder and in general if the oligopoly have truly won or not.
In this case, I'm bringing my grain of salt regarding the utility of the
spam folders. I believe they have a real purpose.
The issue here
Hi
> > First of all: I am fed up with telling people to look for missing emails in
> > their spamfolders.
> >
> > If I have to check a spamfolder for false positives every day, I can just
> > have them delivered to my inbox. The spamfolder does not have an advantage
> > then.
> >
> > Your
> Am 12.09.2022 um 12:28 schrieb Evert Mouw via mailop :
>
> A guy named Carlos Fenolossa wrote on his blog:
>
> After self-hosting my email for twenty-three years I have thrown in the
> towel. The oligopoly has won.
>
> He also states: it's a risk for the industry
>
> The full blogpost can be
Hello,
> Am 14.09.2022 um 16:55 schrieb Thomas Walter via mailop :
>
> First of all: I am fed up with telling people to look for missing emails in
> their spamfolders.
>
> If I have to check a spamfolder for false positives every day, I can just
> have them delivered to my inbox. The
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 09:52:30 Slavko via mailop pisze:
>
> I have idea (not implemented yet) to do server side personal SPAM
> (bayes) filter, which will be trained automatically (based on move
> to/from Junk folder) and will eg. negate delivery to Junk folder from
> central filter. I did some
Dnia 15.09.2022 o godz. 09:07:23 Thomas Walter via mailop pisze:
>
> I'd love to use Ham/Spam filters, but in a very diverse environment
> (university campus) with users of all languages that's a difficult task to
> get right.
In that case these filters clearly should be per-user.
--
Regards,
Hi,
Dňa 15. septembra 2022 7:07:23 UTC používateľ Thomas Walter via mailop
napísal:
>I'd love to use Ham/Spam filters, but in a very diverse environment
>(university campus) with users of all languages that's a difficult task to get
>right.
Sure, in case of big amount of different users,
On 15.09.22 03:04, Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
FWIW in Germany it's against the law to not deliver an email after you
have accepted it. (Not sure if it made it to EU law yet…)
Even spamfolders are a grey area unless you make sure your user is not
only using POP3 to access
On 14.09.22 18:12, William Kern via mailop wrote:
On 9/14/2022 7:49 AM, Thomas Walter via mailop wrote:
Your users opinion may also change if they can't get that automated
'forgot my password' reset link from a service they want to use.
No, they'll contact support and tell them they don't
Moin,
On 14.09.22 17:52, Slavko via mailop wrote:
In my case, the false-positives are really rarely. Mostly when user
meets new eshop (or so) with broken email system (and need to be WL --
but that seems to be improved in last year). The biggest problem, which
i meet with false positives was
> On 14 Sep 2022, at 22:29, Matthias Leisi wrote:
>
>
>> What I’ve said elsewhere is that what consumers, enterprises, and SMBs all
>> need is a healthy selection of services from which to choose. The problem
>> with the entry costs is that you have to be able to leverage a cloud
>>
34 matches
Mail list logo
