Dňa 24. mája 2023 22:41:01 UTC používateľ Graeme Fowler via mailop
napísal:
>[moderator note]
>
>SPF asserts senders (by definition)
>NullMX asserts receivers (also by definition)
>
>Interpretation aside, the fact they are (mis?)understood to be the same thing
>is a clear conflation. It may be
[moderator note]
SPF asserts senders (by definition)
NullMX asserts receivers (also by definition)
Interpretation aside, the fact they are (mis?)understood to be the same
thing is a clear conflation. It may be language based, it may not, but
please stop splitting this specific hair.
Thanks
It appears that Benny Pedersen via mailop said:
>test it please, do you see spf rejects or nullmx rejects ?
nullmx rejects
>sendmail -f ab...@example.org -bv ab...@example.org
Well, yeah, you're faking an example.org sending address.
Don't Do That.
As Laura pointed out, and you just agreed,
Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote on 2023-05-24 18:37:
Considering just DKIM tests, this one is the only tester which
explicitly and clearly recognizes ed25519 signatures. For the rest,
EmailAudit reported a pass, but then said "DKIM key size is 0 bits.
More senders are starting to use 2048
John Levine via mailop skrev den 2023-05-24 19:50:
same thing
I checked with the guy who wrote the Null MX RFC and he is quite
sure they're not the same thing.
xpoint@tux ~ $ dig example.org txt
;; ANSWER SECTION:
example.org.86400 IN TXT
It appears that Benny Pedersen via mailop said:
>John Levine via mailop skrev den 2023-05-24 01:58:
>
>>> domains with this spf would possible know that spf is more weak then
>>> then rfc 7505 (nullMX) ?
>>
>> No, not at all.
>>
>> SPF -all says a domain doesn't send mail.
>
>+1
>
>if recipient
On Tue 23/May/2023 22:27:22 +0200 Tobias Fiebig via mailop wrote:
On Tue, 2023-05-23 at 13:31 -0500, Blake Hudson via mailop wrote:
Anyone have [...] alternative tools for testing DKIM, SPF, and similar in
one go?
Lemme throw email-security-scans.org into the list of tools for this.
;-)
Laura Atkins via mailop skrev den 2023-05-24 10:03:
nullMX means the domain doesn’t receive mail. v=spf1 -all means the
domain doesn’t send mail. When I’m working with clients who are
setting up domains for not-email I recommend both as they address the
issue from different directions.
end
As a postscript to this, I was formerly employed by SparkPost and so still
have some contacts with people associated with Port25.
When this thread kicked off yesterday, I noticed that the DNS for
verifier.port25.com was a bit wonky; specifically, the MX record for that
name resolved to
Marcel commented that they had an issue develop late last Friday (the 19th) and
that they are working on it.
Mike
From: mailop On Behalf Of Alex Irimia via mailop
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 7:38 AM
To: mailop
Subject: [mailop] Yahoo FBL down?
We see a considerable drop in spam complaints
We see a considerable drop in spam complaints at Yahoo since May 18-ish.
Did anyone else notice this?
--
Regards,
Alex Irimia
Postmastery
*Email Infrastructure, Analytics, DMARC and Deliverability*
Amsterdam, NL/Paris, FR
___
mailop mailing list
> On 23 May 2023, at 21:09, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote:
>
> Todd Herr via mailop skrev den 2023-05-23 20:54:
>
>>> Indeed, an email will only be rejected if it has DMARC setup as
>>> reject.
>> There should be one exception to the rule of waiting till after DATA
>> to check for a DMARC
12 matches
Mail list logo
