* [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
@ 2020-10-11 13:04 Martin Brampton
2020-10-11 14:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin Brampton @ 2020-10-11 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
Despite it being neat software, I'm finding it near impossible to run
mlmmj mailing lists because mail is being treated as junk by big mail
outfits such as hotmail and btinternet.
My own mail server (which includes rspamd) accepts mlmmj mailing list
mail without a problem. And I can observe that my mail, as received, is
checked to be valid for DKIM, SPF and DMARC. I've also checked some mail
against e.g. mail-tester.com and not found any problems.
My mail server is not blacklisted anywhere.
Despite this, a number of recipients seem to have messages routinely put
in junk, and they don't all monitor junk. This creates a big problem,
and makes a mailing list unusable.
Obviously, I have no influence with hotmail, btinternet, etc who
probably wouldn't even reply to me.
It seems that big commercial outfits want to force people into paid
services and to prevent them using simple but valuable mechanisms such
as an ordinary mailing list.
Is there anything I can do to deal with this problem?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
@ 2020-10-11 14:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-11 19:25 ` Martin Brampton
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Marcus MERIGHI @ 2020-10-11 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
martin@black-sheep-research.com (Martin Brampton), 2020.10.11 (Sun) 15:04 (CEST):
> Despite it being neat software, I'm finding it near impossible to run mlmmj
> mailing lists because mail is being treated as junk by big mail outfits such
> as hotmail and btinternet.
SPF does not go along too well with traditional mailing lists:
(thats why more and more mailing lists rewrite the From:)
$ dig +short black-sheep-research.com mx
100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
$ dig +short black-sheep-research.com txt
"v=spf1 include:yorkshiremail.com ~all"
$ dig +short yorkshiremail.com mx
100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
$ dig +short mx.yorkshiremail.com
164.90.179.118
$ dig +short yorkshiremail.com txt
"v=spf1 a ip4:79.79.41.36 ip4:164.90.179.118 include:spf.smtp2go.com include:servers.mcsv.net ?all"
... but I get your mail, via the mlmmj list from this IP:
Received: from adhara.zumppe.net (adhara.zumppe.net [198.101.246.47])
This is why my rspamd gives your mail 3 spammy points:
R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[smtpcorp.com:s=a1-4,black-sheep-research.com:s=s151337];
DMARC_POLICY_REJECT(2.00)[black-sheep-research.com : No valid SPF,reject];
below just included for completeness, no score assigned:
DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[smtpcorp.com:-,black-sheep-research.com:-];
FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[martin@black-sheep-research.com,mlmmj@mlmmj.org]
I have no idea whether mlmmj has an option to rewrite the "From:"!
(And I hate the rewritten "From:"s...)
Marcus
> My own mail server (which includes rspamd) accepts mlmmj mailing list mail
> without a problem. And I can observe that my mail, as received, is checked
> to be valid for DKIM, SPF and DMARC. I've also checked some mail against
> e.g. mail-tester.com and not found any problems.
>
> My mail server is not blacklisted anywhere.
>
> Despite this, a number of recipients seem to have messages routinely put in
> junk, and they don't all monitor junk. This creates a big problem, and makes
> a mailing list unusable.
>
> Obviously, I have no influence with hotmail, btinternet, etc who probably
> wouldn't even reply to me.
>
> It seems that big commercial outfits want to force people into paid services
> and to prevent them using simple but valuable mechanisms such as an ordinary
> mailing list.
>
> Is there anything I can do to deal with this problem?
>
>
--
https://www.tor.at/~mcmer/signature.txt
Ich untersage hiermit a) die Verwendung meiner personenbezogenen Daten
zu anderen Zwecken als den in diesem Vorgang gegenstaendlichen sowie b)
die Weitergabe meiner personenbezogenen Daten. Die Nichtbefolgung
dieser Anweisung ist in Oesterreich gesetzeswidrig. Siehe hiezu das
Datenschutzgesetz (DSG) 2000 idgF., zu finden u.a. unter:
http://ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10001597
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
2020-10-11 14:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
@ 2020-10-11 19:25 ` Martin Brampton
2020-10-12 5:12 ` Nudge
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin Brampton @ 2020-10-11 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
Thanks. I don't understand why your rspamd says black-sheep-research.com
has no valid SPF.
Your "digs" show that it has an include for yorkshiremail.com, which in
turn specifies both my own mail server (mx.yorkshiremail.com) and
smpt2go.com which is the mail relay that I use for general mail sending.
Where is there an SPF problem?
I don't either understand why your rspamd doesn't like the DKIM
signature added by the mail relay (smtp2go.com) if that is what it is
complaining about.
On 11/10/2020 15:55, Marcus MERIGHI wrote:
> SPF does not go along too well with traditional mailing lists:
> (thats why more and more mailing lists rewrite the From:)
>
> $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com mx
> 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
>
> $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com txt
> "v=spf1 include:yorkshiremail.com ~all"
>
> $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com mx
> 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
>
> $ dig +short mx.yorkshiremail.com
> 164.90.179.118
>
> $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com txt
> "v=spf1 a ip4:79.79.41.36 ip4:164.90.179.118 include:spf.smtp2go.com include:servers.mcsv.net ?all"
>
> ... but I get your mail, via the mlmmj list from this IP:
>
> Received: from adhara.zumppe.net (adhara.zumppe.net [198.101.246.47])
>
> This is why my rspamd gives your mail 3 spammy points:
>
> R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[smtpcorp.com:s¡-4,black-sheep-research.com:s=s151337];
> DMARC_POLICY_REJECT(2.00)[black-sheep-research.com : No valid SPF,reject];
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
2020-10-11 14:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-11 19:25 ` Martin Brampton
@ 2020-10-12 5:12 ` Nudge
2020-10-12 6:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-12 10:14 ` Martin Brampton
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nudge @ 2020-10-12 5:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 08:25:47PM +0100, Martin Brampton wrote:
> On 11/10/2020 15:55, Marcus MERIGHI wrote:
> > SPF does not go along too well with traditional mailing lists:
> > (thats why more and more mailing lists rewrite the From:)
> >
> > $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com mx
> > 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
> >
> > $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com txt
> > "v=spf1 include:yorkshiremail.com ~all"
> >
> > $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com mx
> > 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
> >
> > $ dig +short mx.yorkshiremail.com
> > 164.90.179.118
> >
> > $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com txt
> > "v=spf1 a ip4:79.79.41.36 ip4:164.90.179.118 include:spf.smtp2go.com include:servers.mcsv.net ?all"
> >
> > ... but I get your mail, via the mlmmj list from this IP:
> >
> > Received: from adhara.zumppe.net (adhara.zumppe.net [198.101.246.47])
> >
> > This is why my rspamd gives your mail 3 spammy points:
> >
> > R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[smtpcorp.com:s¡-4,black-sheep-research.com:s=s151337];
> > DMARC_POLICY_REJECT(2.00)[black-sheep-research.com : No valid SPF,reject];
>
> Thanks. I don't understand why your rspamd says black-sheep-research.com has
> no valid SPF.
>
> Your "digs" show that it has an include for yorkshiremail.com, which in turn
> specifies both my own mail server (mx.yorkshiremail.com) and smpt2go.com
> which is the mail relay that I use for general mail sending.
>
> Where is there an SPF problem?
>
> I don't either understand why your rspamd doesn't like the DKIM signature
> added by the mail relay (smtp2go.com) if that is what it is complaining
> about.
Acknowledge
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-10-12 5:12 ` Nudge
@ 2020-10-12 6:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-12 10:14 ` Martin Brampton
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Marcus MERIGHI @ 2020-10-12 6:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
martin@black-sheep-research.com (Martin Brampton), 2020.10.11 (Sun) 21:25 (CEST):
> Thanks. I don't understand why your rspamd says black-sheep-research.com has
> no valid SPF.
Because the IP of the sending server (mlmmj list server at
198.101.246.47) is not in the SPF-published "allowed sender" IP list:
$ echo black-sheep-research.com | smtpctl spf walk
79.79.41.36
164.90.179.118
45.55.101.18
205.201.128.0/20
198.2.128.0/18
148.105.8.0/21
207.58.142.208/29
207.58.147.64/28
216.22.15.224/27
43.228.184.0/22
103.47.204.0/22
103.36.108.0/22
103.2.140.0/22
203.31.36.0/22
66.128.144.88/29
198.74.56.28
(smtpctl ist a tool on OpenBSD)
Marcus
> Your "digs" show that it has an include for yorkshiremail.com, which in turn
> specifies both my own mail server (mx.yorkshiremail.com) and smpt2go.com
> which is the mail relay that I use for general mail sending.
>
> Where is there an SPF problem?
>
> I don't either understand why your rspamd doesn't like the DKIM signature
> added by the mail relay (smtp2go.com) if that is what it is complaining
> about.
>
>
> On 11/10/2020 15:55, Marcus MERIGHI wrote:
> > SPF does not go along too well with traditional mailing lists:
> > (thats why more and more mailing lists rewrite the From:)
> >
> > $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com mx
> > 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
> >
> > $ dig +short black-sheep-research.com txt
> > "v=spf1 include:yorkshiremail.com ~all"
> >
> > $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com mx
> > 100 mx.yorkshiremail.com.
> >
> > $ dig +short mx.yorkshiremail.com
> > 164.90.179.118
> >
> > $ dig +short yorkshiremail.com txt
> > "v=spf1 a ip4:79.79.41.36 ip4:164.90.179.118 include:spf.smtp2go.com include:servers.mcsv.net ?all"
> >
> > ... but I get your mail, via the mlmmj list from this IP:
> >
> > Received: from adhara.zumppe.net (adhara.zumppe.net [198.101.246.47])
> >
> > This is why my rspamd gives your mail 3 spammy points:
> >
> > R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[smtpcorp.com:s¡-4,black-sheep-research.com:s=s151337];
> > DMARC_POLICY_REJECT(2.00)[black-sheep-research.com : No valid SPF,reject];
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-10-12 6:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
@ 2020-10-12 10:14 ` Martin Brampton
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin Brampton @ 2020-10-12 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mlmmj
OK, thanks. I guess that's inherent in mail server usage.
But I'm having problems with btinternet and hotmail users receiving from
my mailing lists even when I am the sender. And in the case where I am
the sender, the list server is my mail server, and so the mail should
arrive with correct SPF, DKIM and DMARC.
Yet it is still treated as spam.
Is there any solution to any of these problems? Or are conventional
mailing lists obsolete, to the detriment of the usefulness of email?
On 12/10/2020 07:55, Marcus MERIGHI wrote:
> Because the IP of the sending server (mlmmj list server at
> 198.101.246.47) is not in the SPF-published "allowed sender" IP list:
>
> $ echo black-sheep-research.com | smtpctl spf walk
> 79.79.41.36
> 164.90.179.118
> 45.55.101.18
> 205.201.128.0/20
> 198.2.128.0/18
> 148.105.8.0/21
> 207.58.142.208/29
> 207.58.147.64/28
> 216.22.15.224/27
> 43.228.184.0/22
> 103.47.204.0/22
> 103.36.108.0/22
> 103.2.140.0/22
> 203.31.36.0/22
> 66.128.144.88/29
> 198.74.56.28
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-10-12 10:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-10-11 13:04 [mlmmj] Problems with spam filters Martin Brampton
2020-10-11 14:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-11 19:25 ` Martin Brampton
2020-10-12 5:12 ` Nudge
2020-10-12 6:55 ` Marcus MERIGHI
2020-10-12 10:14 ` Martin Brampton
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.