Wow! Just got back from a week in the sun, and the mailing list has been
busy..
A bit off topic, but it is always amazing.. rejecting based on no DKIM?
It's like most new requirements, ever notice that the spammers are
implementing these requirements sooner/faster than the real email
Dnia 17.12.2023 o godz. 10:45:04 Benny Pedersen via mailop pisze:
> >If they use forwarders, SPF will fail in the case the envelope sender
> >isn't rewritten. Check your logs for that.
>
> false, every forwarder changes envelope sender
Definitely not.
Simple forwarding, as done by default by
On 2023-12-17 at 04:45:04 UTC-0500 (Sun, 17 Dec 2023 10:45:04 +0100)
Benny Pedersen via mailop
is rumored to have said:
false, every forwarder changes envelope sender,
No matter how many times you say this, it remains a dangerously
misleading lie.
If, on a Unix-like system running Postfix
On 17/12/2023 15:01, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
> I “think” these new messages represent a clarification on the reasons
> more than a change of the internal reasons. I’ve long suspected their IP
> rate limit message of only sometimes being an actual IP based rate
> limit. I just never
Indeed. We use SRS though and Google seems to like it fine enough, I
just mean to say that I’ll never filter 1:1 what Google considers to be
spam from email forwarding. It’s not all even spam really, but like any
of us they have their own challenges.
I also noticed our list friend Al made a
Hello,
On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 10:45:04AM +0100, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote:
> Marco Moock via mailop skrev den 2023-12-17 09:00:
> > If they use forwarders, SPF will fail in the case the envelope sender
> > isn't rewritten. Check your logs for that.
>
> false, every forwarder changes
On 17/12/2023 10:45, Benny Pedersen via mailop wrote:
hopefully mailman will ARC-Sign / ARC-seal before it breaks dkim
That's not the correct way to do it. Authentication results have to be
collected on entry, before passing the message to Mailman. The seal,
and A-Rs conversion to AAR are
Am 17.12.2023 um 10:45:04 Uhr schrieb Benny Pedersen via mailop:
> false, every forwarder changes envelope sender, so if spf should keep
> pass, its the new forwarding host job to ensure this new envelope
> sender have spf working
That depends on the setting of the forwarder. Some organizations
Marco Moock via mailop skrev den 2023-12-17 09:00:
Am 16.12.2023 um 16:07:19 Uhr schrieb Jarland Donnell via mailop:
Obligatory: We don't intend to send any email their way that could be
perceived as unsolicited, but our users do use forwarders and we'll
never completely match their filters.
Am 17.12.2023 um 09:28:16 Uhr schrieb Andrew C Aitchison via mailop:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2023, Marco Moock via mailop wrote:
>
> > Am 16.12.2023 um 16:07:19 Uhr schrieb Jarland Donnell via mailop:
> >
> >> Obligatory: We don't intend to send any email their way that could
> >> be perceived as
On Sun, 17 Dec 2023, Marco Moock via mailop wrote:
Am 16.12.2023 um 16:07:19 Uhr schrieb Jarland Donnell via mailop:
Obligatory: We don't intend to send any email their way that could be
perceived as unsolicited, but our users do use forwarders and we'll
never completely match their filters.
Am 16.12.2023 um 16:07:19 Uhr schrieb Jarland Donnell via mailop:
> Obligatory: We don't intend to send any email their way that could be
> perceived as unsolicited, but our users do use forwarders and we'll
> never completely match their filters.
If they use forwarders, SPF will fail in the
12 matches
Mail list logo
