-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2022-10-12 at 13:01 +, Slavko via mailop wrote:
> I did some experiments with that (not mail related) in past and most
> often
> user's response was something as -- "They are big, they are doing
> things
> right!" The most of us known, th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 2022-09-04 at 19:49 +, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:
> Regarding the list of IPs - I'd prefer to send it to the interested
> people directly.
> I'd like to have a track of record to whom I have exposed it and
You realize of course t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 2022-09-04 at 00:43 +0200, Radek Kaczynski via mailop wrote:
> If any of you would like to get a full list of our IP addresses and
> domains so that you can block Bouncer's requests - please feel free to
> email me at ra...@usebouncer.com.
P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sat, 2022-09-03 at 17:41 +, ml+mailop--- via mailop wrote:
> How did you notice that "something is now broken"?
A former client was trying to setup Fedora 36 sendmail with dane
validation. F36 comes with sendmail 8.17.1 which is supposed to s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 18:42 +, ml+mailop--- via mailop wrote:
> Are you sure you want 3 0 1 and not 3 1 1?
Yes. We are publishing the hash of the full certificate. Note there are
two tlsa records, one corresponding to the previous LE certificate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Years ago I setup automation for tlsa records to support smtp dane here.
However, something is now broken, and I am not sure what is wrong.
_25._tcp.mail3.five-ten-sg.com. IN TLSA 3 0 1 (
834d710b2feb790cc9b2c6d251c65b1fedc24c51a4149bdfeae4d40e0be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2022-07-20 at 12:41 -0600, Brie via mailop wrote:
> It's still going on even though it was 'being looked into'.
Fixed here by blacklisting the DKIM signature from zoom.us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iHMEAREKADMWIQSuFMepaSkjWnTxQ5QvqPuaK
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sat, 2022-07-09 at 17:22 -0600, Anne Mitchell via mailop wrote:
> "It shall be unlawful for an operator of an email service to use a
> filtering algorithm to apply a label to an email sent to an email
> account from a political campaign unless the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2022-03-30 at 10:55 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> Imagine the day where you can't use email unless you use Gmail or
> o356.
If that happens, there will be two mail systems (gmail/o365) and
(everyone else). If the (gmail/o365)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2022-03-30 at 09:56 -0500, Al Iverson via mailop wrote:
> Since this specifically refers to domain reputation I'd make sure all
> mail is properly signing with DKIM. Domain rep can also fall back to
> the return-path domain, so if that's diff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2021-08-04 at 16:40 -0700, Luke via mailop wrote:
> Bounces and spam report percentages dropped.
I am probably not the only one that has SA blocking all mail from some
of those senders.
header SENDGRID4 X-Entity-ID =~ /7mxhBNMkQ9yfwz0A5\+NG
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2021-07-08 at 09:14 -0700, Luke via mailop wrote:
> Both of the accounts reported by Michael have been suspended.
DATE: 07/11/21 07:00:22 PDT
IP: o5.sg.zoom.us :::149.72.199.144
env_From: bounces+21079884-d4de-..
X-Entity-ID: 7mxhBNM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2021-07-08 at 09:31 +0300, Atro Tossavainen via mailop wrote:
> That one is Zoom.us itself.
> Received: from o5.sg.zoom.us (o5.sg.zoom.us [149.72.199.144])
> Received: from o12.ptr3622.sg.zoom.us (o12.ptr3622.sg.zoom.us
> [167.89.93.232])
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2021-07-06 at 23:59 +0300, Atro Tossavainen via mailop wrote:
> X-Entity-ID: 7mxhBNMkQ9yfwz0A5+NG7Q==
> Return-Path: https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 21:46 -0400, yuv via mailop wrote:
> but I do like the fact that if someone puts
> a letter with my address in a post office box anywhere in the world,
> it
> makes its way to my snail box within a reliable service standard.
Yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 10:04 -0600, Lyle Giese via mailop wrote:
> I just looked at the dns entries for foddi.net. The A and
> records for mx1.mail.foddi.net has a TTL of 120 seconds. For many mail
> providers that indicates a dynamic IP address.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 07:28 -0800, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> But yeah, it's ugly on Azure right now..
41.201.224.52.list.dnswl.org. 10800 IN TXT "cloudapp.azure.com
https://dnswl.org/s/?s=53622";
41.201.224.52.list.dnswl.org. 10800 IN
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 12:03 +, Andy Smith via mailop wrote:
> From: "chiark.greenend.org.uk"
So sendgrid account 15204622 was sending mail as:
Received: from dhl.com (unknown)
by ismtpd0005p1lon1.sendgrid.net (SG)
with ESMTP id
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2020-08-18 at 15:23 +0300, Atro Tossavainen via mailop wrote:
> The SendGrid account sending these yesterday is 13999362.
Where do you find that account number in the headers? I see some from
today with "Upgrade (FINAL WARNING)" in the subje
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 2020-07-24 at 22:08 -0400, John Levine via mailop wrote:
> Depends whether you consider Comcast to be big. They sure have a lot
> of customers.
If five-ten-sg.com wants to deliver to comcast.net, my publishing tlsa
records for _25._tcp.mail3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2020-07-16 at 00:07 +0300, Atro Tossavainen via mailop wrote:
> Since https://www.ono.com/ is equally unaccessible from my domestic
> Internet connection (also in Finland), I'd say #1 sounds more likely
> to me.
I can ping www.ono.com == 62.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 16:45 -0400, Bill Cole via mailop wrote:
> > This problem is part of why DMARC was developed. Very few people are
> adequately confident of their understanding of DMARC and of its
> reliability to make it the root cause of mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 08:55 -0500, Michael Rathbun via mailop wrote:
> > Pointing out to users reporting these that blocking Sendgrid
> entirely
> (the temptation arises) would take out the SG traffic that is highly
> desired (at least 70%).
Two mon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2020-05-05 at 15:06 -0700, Jay Hennigan via mailop wrote:
> On 5/5/20 14:30, Blake Hudson via mailop wrote:
> > Been getting a variety of Amex scams for several weeks via SendGrid.
> > Wish they had a better reporting mechanism.
> The report
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 23:39 -0500, Michael Rathbun via mailop wrote:
> > The one we see from that group is 183.136.225.44, currently knocking
> at the
> door but being halted by the "all 183.128.0.0/11 refuse" rule.
183.136.225.45 and 183.136.225.4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tue, 2020-05-05 at 07:48 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> This is a little too obvious, and while historically SendGrid ran a
> tight ship, and got a little lee way from spam auditors.. it's getting
> very bad, and going on for too lon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 2020-04-17 at 09:28 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> * SendGrid compromised accounts sending phishing
> Seeing a lot more cases of this occurring again, mostly phishing
> attacks.
Yup.
IP: wrqvbqzd.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net ::
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2019-11-25 at 10:32 -0800, Kurt Andersen (b) via mailop wrote:
> Are you seeing any significant portion of these messages bearing the
> Form-Sub header? (documented in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-
> levine-mailbomb-header-01)
On a low
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2019-11-21 at 17:09 +0100, Claus Assmann via mailop wrote:
> I wasted several hours to set up one host to get a Let's Encrypt cert,
> configured my server to use that for connections from mimecast, and
> ... still get the same error.
My serv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 22:06 -0400, John Levine via mailop wrote:
> In article <1570757713.1030.53.ca...@16bits.net> you write:
> >Count me too as someone with a tiny server that Gmail automatically
> >files in spam with apparently no reason.
> >There
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Anyone here work for or have a contact at WSJ (or possibly createsend)?
We have some subscribers to their interactive.wsj.com email version, and
they receive it nicely. But exactly one user has been unable to receive
anything other than 1-1 correspon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 16:10 -0700, Alan Hodgson via mailop wrote:
> You can sign with a sub-domain or parent domain as long as they share
> the same organizational domain.
My understanding was incorrect. Page 10 of RFC7489 says "In relaxed
mode, the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 20:12 +, Benjamin BILLON via mailop wrote:
> If those emails seem to be sent from botnets, I believe they're not
> sent from QQ.com. They have a SPF -all policy, a p=none DMARC policy,
> and I can't check if they have DKIM b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 16:49 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> PPS, You know the IP(s) can change at any time ;)
That is what cron is for. So far, synapp.io has been very good about
listing *only* their own address validators in their spf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 09:12 -0700, Michael Peddemors via mailop wrote:
> Speaking of.. anyone have any insight into these guys?
> They keep popping up on various CDN's eg, DO, AZURE, etc..
> 45.32.138.192 (M) 1 mta-wk-3.mk3.ipruz.
35 matches
Mail list logo
