Just a quick note, having discussed this with several of the ISPs
impacted.
It appears that this is limited to the Calix A144 E/G models (we hope).
Hackers are both sending spam out... As well as performing auth attacks.
The auth attacks make sense, since most ISP's are more tolerant of
Moin,
am 20.10.22 um 01:40 schrieb Ángel via mailop:
On 2022-10-19 at 11:37 -0700, Michael Peddemors wrote:
I am not going to go into whether operating a service on the internet
is a 'right' or a 'privelege', but coming into my home sure is..
Well, precisely. Providing an address should be no
Am 19.10.22 um 22:58 schrieb Martin Neitzel via mailop:
My private Mailserver never ran into problems delivering to
@t-online.de recipents. And there's no impressum for it -- not
even a matching web server.
Then I supppose you're using IP space tagged with your name, which
trumps the imprint
On 2022-10-19 at 11:37 -0700, Michael Peddemors wrote:
> > I hear your message, but I can't believe the only way out is to dox
> > myself.
>
> I don't think it is 'doxing' unless you are trying to hide ;)
>
> I am not going to go into whether operating a service on the internet
> is a 'right' or
On 2022-10-19 at 21:28 +0200, Bernardo Reino via mailop wrote:
> Yup. I have another server for which I have to request whitelisting..
> but it's a bit more difficult because the front page of the domain is
> the webmail (roundcube), so I have to figure out how to inject the
> Impressum there.
Moin,
am 19.10.22 um 22:42 schrieb Wolfgang Rosenauer via mailop:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
The sending IP belongs to a rented host (rented from a major German
hoster). The
Am 20.10.22 um 00:04 schrieb Kirill Miazine via mailop:
In the German Net Neutrality report 2020/2021, published by
Bundesnetzagentur, section 24, they say:
In several cases end-users could not receive incoming emails. They
believed that internet access providers were blocking emails
Am 19.10.22 um 22:41 schrieb Slavko via mailop:
Dňa 19. októbra 2022 17:38:27 UTC používateľ Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop
napísal:
Might be true in general, but the t-online.de case is different. They happily
do send to any MXable domain. They do not accept all responses to the email
• Bernardo Reino via mailop [2022-10-19 20:24]:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Kirill Miazine via mailop wrote:
>
> > • Bernardo Reino via mailop [2022-10-19 14:51]:
> > > On 2022-10-19 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
> > > >
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
Am 19.10.22 um 21:28 schrieb Bernardo Reino via mailop:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
If you try deleting the impressum, please share your experience on what
happens with t-online.
Yup. I have another
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
Which OTOH means that Deutsche Telekom is still whitelisting mailservers that
comply with their request to be able to identify the other side. And which
means that the subject is false, nothing has basically changed besides the
Am 19.10.22 um 21:28 schrieb Bernardo Reino via mailop:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
If you try deleting the impressum, please share your experience on what happens
with t-online.
Yup. I have another server for which I have to request whitelisting.. but it's
a bit
Moin,
am 19.10.22 um 20:08 schrieb Bernardo Reino via mailop:
Well, now that it's public anyway -> www.bbmk.org
BTW they replied an hour ago with:
[…]
which means they'll whitelist the IP address (can take up to 24h).
Which OTOH means that Deutsche Telekom is still whitelisting
> They blocked at least my non commercial mail server until I added an
> impressum. So, I guess they now block everyone without an impressum.
My private Mailserver never ran into problems delivering to
@t-online.de recipents. And there's no impressum for it -- not
even a matching web server.
Am 19.10.22 um 18:25 schrieb Michael Peddemors via mailop:
On 2022-10-19 08:38, Carsten Schiefner via mailop wrote:
Grant & all -
if it‘s a .de domain name one does not need a privacy service any
longer since 2018(?) as the GDPR (or its interpretation) mandates that
holder data must not be
Hi,
Am 19.10.22 um 14:42 schrieb Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop:
Moin,
on 19.10.22 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Personally I doubt any discussion on whatever
Hi,
Am 19.10.22 um 14:28 schrieb Bernardo Reino via mailop:
On 2022-10-19 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Is this the new world?
A given mailhost (ran privately
Dňa 19. októbra 2022 17:38:27 UTC používateľ Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop
napísal:
>Might be true in general, but the t-online.de case is different. They happily
>do send to any MXable domain. They do not accept all responses to the email
>their users sent. To me, §7 (1) UWG looks promising
mailop-requ...@mailop.org skrev den 2022-10-19 18:56:
They clearly have a default 'block' policy. The reject message is
presented immediately upon connection.
$ telnet mx00.t-online.de 25
Trying 194.25.134.8...
Connected to mx00.t-online.de.
Escape character is '^]'.
554 IP=66.254.66.70 - A
> Am 19.10.2022 um 19:09 schrieb Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop
> :
>
> On 19.10.22 18:21, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
>> It looks more like t-online.de blocks incoming connections from the whole
>> world, except from a list of IP addresses they maintain internally. To get
>> added to
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
On 10/19/22 20:08, Bernardo Reino via mailop wrote:
I wonder what happens if I delete the "Impressum" in a few days, but who
knows, maybe they do add some monitoring for *that* ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you try deleting the impressum, please share
On 2022/10/19 20:37, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
...snip...
If you want to be accepted as a 'good netizen', then show you are responsible for what goes out onto the internet from
your networks and servers. You roll the dice otherwise.
Thank you for taking the time to type out a
On 10/19/22 20:08, Bernardo Reino via mailop wrote:
I wonder what happens if I delete the "Impressum" in a few days, but who
knows, maybe they do add some monitoring for *that* ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you try deleting the impressum, please share your experience on what
happens with t-online.
On 2022-10-19 10:30, Johann Haarhoff via mailop wrote:
On 2022/10/19 18:05, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
On 2022-10-19 07:52, Slavko via mailop wrote:
For the record, while they might be going about it the wrong way,
transparency is key to reputation.
If you obfuscate, or don't have
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Kirill Miazine via mailop wrote:
• Bernardo Reino via mailop [2022-10-19 14:51]:
On 2022-10-19 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
Dnia 19.10.2022 o godz. 18:56:17 Bernardo Reino via mailop pisze:
After I contacted them they told me that they only accept e-mail from
commercial servers, so in my case (private/family server) I would have to
add an "Impressum" (to the
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 05:49:40PM +0200, Carsten Schiefner via mailop wrote:
> Having read up the entire thread now, I wonder if this issue might be worth
> raising with Germany‘s federal regulator for (inter alia) postal and telco
> services, BNetzA.
Maybe better trying to get one of the
• Bernardo Reino via mailop [2022-10-19 14:51]:
> On 2022-10-19 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
> > wrote:
> > > A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
> > > messages to T-Online anymore.
> > >
>
On 19.10.22 18:16, Marcel Becker via mailop wrote:
Just like nobody can force you to accept any emails from any sender into your
systems, you can not force others either.
Might be true in general, but the t-online.de case is different. They happily
do send to any MXable domain. They do not
On 2022/10/19 18:05, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
On 2022-10-19 07:52, Slavko via mailop wrote:
For the record, while they might be going about it the wrong way, transparency
is key to reputation.
If you obfuscate, or don't have an associated URL with the domain in the PTR records, it
On 2022/10/19 17:12, Grant Taylor via mailop wrote:
..snip..
Do you use privacy options in WhoIs for your domain name? Since you (understandably) obfuscated your domain name I
can't check.
I wonder if having real, non-privacy options, in a domain name helps with this.
I didn't explicitly
Dnia 19.10.2022 o godz. 18:56:17 Bernardo Reino via mailop pisze:
>
> After I contacted them they told me that they only accept e-mail from
> commercial servers, so in my case (private/family server) I would have to
> add an "Impressum" (to the associated www site) in order to make it
>
Dnia 19.10.2022 o godz. 18:55:29 Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop pisze:
>
> It would be less of an issue if t-online.de would take care _not_ to send
> to domains they don't take the replies from; but they happily sent emails
> to any MX in the world (anything else would upset _their_ users), but
On 19.10.22 18:43, Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote:
Do you get this error at the connection or after you transmitted the message?
$ telnet mx00.t-online.de 25
Trying 194.25.134.8...
Connected to mx00.t-online.de.
Escape character is '^]'.
554 IP=378.294.445.288 - A problem occurred. (Ask
Dňa 19. októbra 2022 16:07:36 UTC používateľ "Adam Gołębiowski via mailop"
napísal:
>How should BNetZa evaluate who is good and who is bad here?
Of course, someone must. As in current state his server's IP is
"bad", only because is not "comercional or similar" (BTW my too,
but i can ignore
On 19.10.22 18:25, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
On 2022-10-19 08:38, Carsten Schiefner via mailop wrote:
Grant & all -
if it‘s a .de domain name one does not need a privacy service any longer since
2018(?) as the GDPR (or its interpretation) mandates that holder data must not
be
On 19/10/2022 17:16, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
On 10/19/22 16:10, Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
On 19.10.22 15:55, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
They blocked at least my non commercial mail server until I added an
impressum. So, I guess they now block everyone without an
On 19.10.22 17:49, Carsten Schiefner via mailop wrote:
Having read up the entire thread now, I wonder if this issue might be worth
raising with Germany‘s federal regulator for (inter alia) postal and telco
services, BNetzA.
I wonder what would happen if the owner of a 20-storey apartment
On 19.10.22 18:21, Gellner, Oliver via mailop wrote:
It looks more like t-online.de blocks incoming connections from the whole
world, except from a list of IP addresses they maintain internally. To get
added to this list you have to a) contact them manually and b) fulfill
arbitrary rules that
On Wed 19/Oct/2022 14:46:39 +0200 Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
On 19.10.22 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 8:54 AM Carsten Schiefner via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
Having read up the entire thread now, I wonder if this issue might be worth
> raising with Germany‘s federal regulator for (inter alia) postal and telco
> services, BNetzA.
>
I'd say don't embarrass
Us as well.
We are in the US. That is OUR IP space announced by our ASN.
So I assume we would qualify as a commercial ISP.
That IP (and for the most part our IP space) is clean. That IP has been
active for years.
I doubt they have seen our IPs before as our customers here in Southern
On 2022-10-19 08:38, Carsten Schiefner via mailop wrote:
Grant & all -
if it‘s a .de domain name one does not need a privacy service any longer since
2018(?) as the GDPR (or its interpretation) mandates that holder data must not
be available via WHOIS to the general public.
Please provide
But that's what is actually happening worldwide, except that these rules
that apatment building are enforcing are spam filtering and dnsbl.
Not that I like DT's approach, but using BNetzA seems wrong here - once
we open this path, what should they do when some well-known spammer who
is in
On 10/19/22 17:16, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
> Actually, I had to contact them and show them the impressum page to be
> whitelisted, so this seems at least partially manual. So, you might need to
> contact them for any new IP. But I hope they are smart enough to store the
> domain names in
Grant & all -
if it‘s a .de domain name one does not need a privacy service any longer since
2018(?) as the GDPR (or its interpretation) mandates that holder data must not
be available via WHOIS to the general public.
I would not be surprised if that‘d hold true for all ccTLDs where the GDPR
On 2022-10-19 07:52, Slavko via mailop wrote:
For the record, while they might be going about it the wrong way,
transparency is key to reputation.
If you obfuscate, or don't have an associated URL with the domain in the
PTR records, it makes it hard for someone to contact the operator of the
Having read up the entire thread now, I wonder if this issue might be worth
raising with Germany‘s federal regulator for (inter alia) postal and telco
services, BNetzA.
I wonder what would happen if the owner of a 20-storey apartment building would
only allow properly accredited - according to
On 10/19/22 9:01 AM, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote:
imho same problem as i reported here
https://gitlab.com/fumail/fuglu/-/issues/262
There may be a legitimate bug in the DKIM implementation /if/ it's
signing things without the knowledge of the operator.
That being said, over-signing is a
On 10/19/22 16:10, Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
On 19.10.22 15:55, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
They blocked at least my non commercial mail server until I added an
impressum. So, I guess they now block everyone without an impressum.
But that's the status quo for several years.
On 10/19/22 7:25 AM, Johann Haarhoff via mailop wrote:
T-Online:
the IP address is delegated to your provider and there
is no owner data in the public whois record for your domain.
Thus, the person or company who is responsible for this host is
essentially anonymous to third parties.
mailop-requ...@mailop.org skrev den 2022-10-19 05:11:
Including the resent-* headers is interesting to me, seeing as how they
aren't included in the message. I don't know if this was an
intentional
over-sign or over zealous configuration.
imho same problem as i reported here
Dňa 19. októbra 2022 13:49:08 UTC používateľ Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop
napísal:
>It's not the first time this has been discussed, and I doubt that any amount
>of complaints from 3-mails-a-month-to-t-online operators would change their
>mind. Unfortunately, they are quite big in terms of
On 19.10.22 15:55, Renaud Allard via mailop wrote:
They blocked at least my non commercial mail server until I added an impressum. So, I guess they now block everyone without an impressum.
But that's the status quo for several years. Question is: do they still adhere
to that, or would they
On 10/19/22 15:49, Kai 'wusel' Siering via mailop wrote:
But see my initial reply: it's unclear as of now if section 4.1 of their
postmaster site still applies, or if they now reject any application
from "non-commercial" mailservers (as their current statement implies).
They blocked at
On 19.10.22 14:28, Bernardo Reino via mailop wrote:
The 554 occurs while connecting, so they really reject only based on the
IP/range, which is indeed quite brutal.
Hopefully this is just a misconfiguration (or a badly interpreted/implemented policy).
No, it isn't. It's the way Deutsche
Hi
> Is this the new world?
>
> A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
> messages to T-Online anymore.
I had a similar problem earlier this year which I couldn't resolve, so I've ended up just accepting I cannot deliver to
t-online.de
After some back and forth with
I have my doubts about t-online.de caring about SPF+DKIM+DMARC, not
having deployed it themselves. It has been quite tedious to filter spam
abusing that domain.
On 19/10/2022 15:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
A
On 10/19/22 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Is this the new world?
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online
On 2022-10-19 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
Do you get this error at
Moin,
on 19.10.22 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Personally I doubt any discussion on whatever mailing list would make Deutsche
Telekom change their mind about this.
On 19.10.22 14:25, Stefano Bagnara via mailop wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
Do you get this error at
Dňa 19. októbra 2022 12:00:55 UTC používateľ Hans-Martin Mosner via mailop
napísal:
>But there's another side to the story:
>
>That hoster is Hetzner. With their equally unacceptable policies regarding
>abuse reports, they are at least partially creating this problem for their
>customers
On 2022-10-19 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
Hello,
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Is this the new world?
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 at 13:32, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop
wrote:
> A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
> messages to T-Online anymore.
>
> 554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
Do you get this error at the connection or after you transmitted the
Hi,
That hoster is Hetzner. With their equally unacceptable policies regarding
abuse reports, they are at least partially
creating this problem for their customers themselves.
Did this issue only occur with Hetzner for now?
Regards
Bjoern
___
Dnia 19.10.2022 o godz. 13:33:04 Heiko Schlittermann via mailop pisze:
> (translation by me):
> Sorry, we only accept messages from proven
> commercial or similiar servers. Please use the SMTP relay of your hoster
> or your ISP.
>
> I know that T-Online's postmaster announced this kind of
Am 19.10.22 um 13:33 schrieb Heiko Schlittermann via mailop:
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
The sending IP belongs to a rented host (rented from a major German
hoster).
@mailops: What's your opinion?
I consider this unacceptable (at least when they don't offer a
Hey Heiko,
On 19.10.22 13:33, Heiko Schlittermann via mailop wrote:
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
The sending IP belongs to a rented host (rented from a major German
hoster). The
Hello,
I'm not sure how to complain and where. But I hope that here we can
start a discussion again. I'm quite upset.
Is this the new world?
A given mailhost (ran privately for smaller entities) can't send
messages to T-Online anymore.
554 IP=168.119.159.241 - A problem occurred. …
The
70 matches
Mail list logo
