Re: [mailop] Many Google "social engineering content" false-positives

2019-01-09 Thread Brandon Long via mailop
So, the problem isn't strictly the CNAMEs, its the fact that the same page with the same path is served on all of the domains on that server. If you restricted serving of the link-tracking link to the domain it was supposed to be for, it would only have affected that domain. I've submitted your

Re: [mailop] Many Google "social engineering content" false-positives

2019-01-09 Thread Brandon Long via mailop
If you send me a list of affected domains, I can raise an internal escalation to the safe browsing team so they can see if the rules are working as expected or not. Brandon On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:48 AM Tim Starr wrote: > We have a case of many clients' link-tracking domains being all

[mailop] Many Google "social engineering content" false-positives

2019-01-09 Thread Tim Starr
We have a case of many clients' link-tracking domains being all flagged for "social engineering content." I see that there's a case-by-case security review request process, but is there any way to handle it for many at once? This seems to have been due to many different domains all being CNAMEd to

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread Benjamin BILLON
I didn't find shorter than "List of domain names formerly used to receive massive amounts of emails" for the title of the page, if someone has a better idea, please sho[o|u]t ... -- Benjamin -Original Message- From: mailop On Behalf Of Benjamin BILLON Sent: mardi 8 janvier 2019 20:19

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread Grant Taylor via mailop
On 01/09/2019 09:45 AM, John Levine wrote: Sounds like it'd be more productive to fix the code in the MTA rather than to invent a band-aid and then try to make the MTA use the band-aid. Rejecting mail for authoritative NXDOMAIN failure is pretty basic. I think most of the MTAs (that I've

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread John Levine
In article you write: >On 01/09/2019 07:58 AM, John Levine wrote: >> Sounds like it'd be more useful to persuade those domains to publish a >> null MX. Then everyone's mail to them will fail automagically. > >Agreed. > >However that requires that the domains still be registered and having

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread Grant Taylor via mailop
On 01/09/2019 07:58 AM, John Levine wrote: Sounds like it'd be more useful to persuade those domains to publish a null MX. Then everyone's mail to them will fail automagically. Agreed. However that requires that the domains still be registered and having DNS service. Granted, MTAs should

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread Patrick Ben Koetter
* John Levine : > In article <0eb10a39-fe76-e064-ae17-dc1484260...@stefan-neufeind.de> you > write: > >Part of my reason to start this mail-thread was that for some domains > >which get mistypes from time to time (like gmail.de instead of > >gmail.com) it would maybe nice to reject that email

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread John Levine
In article <0eb10a39-fe76-e064-ae17-dc1484260...@stefan-neufeind.de> you write: >Part of my reason to start this mail-thread was that for some domains >which get mistypes from time to time (like gmail.de instead of >gmail.com) it would maybe nice to reject that email right away ... Sounds like

Re: [mailop] List of unused, big email-domains?

2019-01-09 Thread Stefan Neufeind
On 1/8/19 9:20 PM, John Levine wrote: > In article > you write: >> -=-=-=-=-=- >> -=-=-=-=-=- >> >> On 01/08/2019 12:46 PM, John Levine wrote: >>> Why would spam trap domains want to say anything? >> >> So that their domain(s) would be ineligible to be listed. > > You're still making the key