Re: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

In general it is the concept of sending from a particular domain in a format that the infrastructure on that domain will not send. A really easy to grasp concept: I know that example.com's mail server always adds a X-Yup-We-Sent-It: True header, so I will consider anything claiming to be

Re: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 10:15:33 -0400 Joseph Brennan wrote: > If I recall correctly MISSING_HEADERS, which > refers only to the To: header, hits when To: exists but is blank. I just tested it and the To header has to be missing altogether.

Re: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

What is a "faked mail" ? On 11/1/19 3:15 PM, Joseph Brennan wrote: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL is a meta on: (MISSING_HEADERS||__HDRS_LCASE) && FREEMAIL_FROM So that and MISSING_HEADERS itself add up to 3.0 points. This seems high. We rejected a message from gmail that hit MALFORMED_FREEMAIL and

Re: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

Joseph Brennan wrote: Oh, replying to myself... I just tested sending from a Gmail account to my regular columbia.edu address, using BCC and with no address in "To:". This did not hit MISSING_HEADERS, and in fact had /To: undisclosed-recipients:;/.  So now I don't know

Re: MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

Oh, replying to myself... I just tested sending from a Gmail account to my regular columbia.edu address, using BCC and with no address in "To:". This did not hit MISSING_HEADERS, and in fact had /To: undisclosed-recipients:;/. So now I don't know what the sender did in the case I was writing

MALFORMED_FREEMAIL

MALFORMED_FREEMAIL is a meta on: (MISSING_HEADERS||__HDRS_LCASE) && FREEMAIL_FROM So that and MISSING_HEADERS itself add up to 3.0 points. This seems high. We rejected a message from gmail that hit MALFORMED_FREEMAIL and MISSING_HEADERS, and a few other low-scoring things. Because it was