On 7 Dec 2018, at 11:14, Ken O'Driscoll via mailop wrote:
It would be super helpful if any mailbox provider here could tell me
what
they see with MailChimp regarding TLS.
I looked at a hundred random samples dating back to mid November. I saw
exactly zero that used TLS inbound. The sample
Hi everyone,
I have a client who uses MailChimp. Now, I have noticed that for this
particular customer's campaigns, MailChimp does not always appear to
attempt to initiate (not a failed negotiation etc.) STARTTLS when talking
to our mail server. It does sometimes, but not always.
While I
On 2018-12-06 at 17:52 -0800, Autumn Tyr-Salvia wrote:
> Hello Mail Operators,
> My job is to help large organizations figure out their email
> infrastructure and authenticate everything legitimate with the goal of
> going to DMARC p=reject. A customer recently reported an issue to me
> about
For a perspective on how we address this..
We take a middle of the road approach.
For companies such as banks, paypal, and other big targets of phishing
attacks, we go stronger, in some cases even rejecting on ~all, and for
high volume senders with -all we also reject, right at the SMTP
"How common is it to have receiver systems set so that SPF hard fail will
reject messages even if they otherwise pass DKIM and DMARC, but to accept
them on the DKIM pass if the domain uses SPF soft fail?"
SPF checking is/can be done at the MAIL FROM part of the conversation; it's
keyed to the
On 6 Dec 2018, at 20:52, Autumn Tyr-Salvia wrote:
I have a lot of experience with SPF, though admittedly, I don't have
as
much experience with SPF failures (I see a lot of cases of no SPF, or
passing but not aligned SPF, but comparatively few actual failures),
but I
haven't heard this
SPF (RFC 7208) explicitly allows recipient to block e-mail based on SPF
policy in the case of the hard fail. In practice, blocking mail based on
hard fail policy is rare, but not unusual.
In short, there are 2 recommendations for you situation:
1. Consider implementing SRS (sender rewrite
Have you reported it to abuse? Have they failed to act on it?
laura
> On 6 Dec 2018, at 20:31, Jay Hennigan wrote:
>
> I just received spam from jeb...@cogzentappz.com sent via Constant Contact.
> Headers verify that it is indeed from Constant Contact. The spam was sent to
> an address
Thanks for sharing, Michael!
Ewald
--
Deliverability & Abuse Management, www.webpower-group.com
ewald.kess...@webpower.nl
t: +31 342 423 262
li: www.linkedin.com/in/ewaldkessler
On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 16:28, Michael E. Weisel
wrote:
> I just wanted to give an update on this. It seems that
This behavior of respecting the published policy is the way to go, until it's
not anymore. You have to be a big enough receiver for having enough complaints
about unreceived legit emails without taking the time to educate/explain that
an admin didn't do his job properly. And also to afford not
10 matches
Mail list logo
