Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "Sieve "foreverypart" and "mime" extensions (RFC 5703) now implemented"
2016 Jun 01
3
forwarding emails using sieve
I know this is a tad tangential to dovecot, but maybe someone has some
pointers for me. I'm trying to forward emails using the sieve filtering
and redirect doesn't do it because it doesn't wrap the message in a new
email, instead, it seems to just change the envelope From (and To). This
causes the outbound relay to reject the message for security/spam
reasons (forged From). It
2016 Mar 21
3
sieve - editheader - edit in place
Hello,
i do some tests with sieve editheader extensions. deleteheader and
addheader are working, but i noticed that new headerlines are always
prepended to current header. So new lines can be found always on top. I
am looking for a possibility to edit a headerline in place, without
moving the new line to top of stack(replaceheader?). It is not looking
good if a Subject-Line suddenly moves to
2020 Oct 25
7
forwarding email with sieve of spf domains
Say someone has setup spf for his domain and sends an email to a user
that has in roundcube enabled the sieve forward. If the message is
forwarded without altering the message headers, this could result in a
message being blocked or not relayed, because sending hosts ip, is not
in the spf of the from: domain.
Possible solutions are:
- add option if enabled, it replaces the From: with that
2017 Aug 24
3
dmarc report faild ?
Hello Together
Please i have new following Error, from DMARC Report, if i check my domain
on example mxtoolbox i dont see any problems.
Any from you know this Eror report, what i need to do to fix this issue?
C:\folder>nslookup 94.237.32.243
Server: dns204.data.ch
Address: 211.232.23.124
Name: wursti.dovecot.fi
Address: 94.237.32.243
2015 Jan 04
4
DMARC test
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:27 AM, gene.cumm at yahoo.com <gene.cumm at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Test from Yahoo via Android
> >
> > --Gene
> > _______________________________________________
> > Syslinux mailing list
> > Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com
> > Unsubscribe or set options at:
2019 Feb 11
3
[fdo] PSA: Mailman changes, From addresses no longer accurate
Hi all,
We have hit another step change in aggressive anti-spam techniques
from major mail providers. Over the past few days, we saw a huge spike
in the number of mails we were failing to deliver to GMail and
outlook.com in particular.
It looks like it is now no longer acceptable for us to break
DMARC/DKIM/SPF. These are DNS-based extensions to SMTP, which allow
domains to publish policies as to
2019 Feb 11
3
[fdo] PSA: Mailman changes, From addresses no longer accurate
Hi all,
We have hit another step change in aggressive anti-spam techniques
from major mail providers. Over the past few days, we saw a huge spike
in the number of mails we were failing to deliver to GMail and
outlook.com in particular.
It looks like it is now no longer acceptable for us to break
DMARC/DKIM/SPF. These are DNS-based extensions to SMTP, which allow
domains to publish policies as to
2017 Aug 24
3
dmarc report faild ?
In the same vein,
I am receiving forensic DMARC reports from mx01.nausch.org.
Whenever I send a message to the mailing list or when my server sends a
DMARC report, I'm getting a DMARC Forensic report.
It's odd, because the actual report tells me both DKIM and SPF (in the
the of a DMARC report) pass...
Here is what I am getting :
This is an authentication failure report for an email
2023 Jan 17
1
submission_host auth
> Let's say we have dovecot + sieve plugin container.
> Dovecot configured to use remote SMTP submission host to send messages:
> submission_host = postfix.example.com:587
I reviewed my config to see how i did it. I think you are right and SASL isn't used here. I have dovecot and postfix on the same machine and in dovecot i set
submission_host = localhost:25
Then in my
2015 Jan 17
0
DMARC test (request)
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 07:37:44PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 12:14:51PM -0500, Gene Cumm wrote:
<snip/>
> > As far as I can tell, GMail does process the SPF/DKIM/DMARC properties
> > but ignores Yahoo!'s DMARC policy to reject on failure.
>
> The Syslinux ML should now be ready for DMARC p=reject
>
> We shall see how
2018 Oct 01
6
email Server for CentOS 7
> On 29. Sep 2018, at 23:58, John R. Dennison <jrd at gerdesas.com> wrote:
>
> Save yourself the effort, time, headaches and eventual bloody tears of impotent
> rage and just go with Google or some other provider. Running a mail
> server properly is one of the more difficult tasks and quite often not
> worth the time and trouble, especially if one is asking about it on a
2019 Feb 11
2
[fdo] PSA: Google dropping a lot of list email
Hi all,
There's a good chance that the people who most need to see this won't
see it, but here goes anyway.
Google is currently dropping a _lot_ of the mail we attempt to deliver
to lists.fd.o subscribers. The immediate cause is sending on mail from
domains with SPF/DKIM/DMARC policies which explicitly specify that
lists.fd.o cannot relay mail on their behalf. Every time we do that,
not
2024 Jul 20
2
openssh-unix-dev DMARC-related settings (was Re: scattered thoughts on connection sharing)
On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 5:14?AM Stuart Henderson <stu at spacehopper.org> wrote:
> The mail admins can choose what is covered by the DKIM signature.
> In the case of barclays.com there are various headers (which I think
> make it through the mailing list untouched) but also the body, which
> does not; a footer with the list URL is added.
The real issue here is that the Mailman
2020 Oct 08
6
Mail server troubles
Hi,
This is probably a bit OT, but here goes.
I've been running our local school's mail server since 2013, with mail
addresses for school staff and some teachers. The server is running CentOS 7
with Postfix and Dovecot, and it's a nice no-bullshit configuration with SPF,
DKIM and DMARC.
The school sends quite a lot of email out to parents, and sometimes, mail gets
rejected:
2015 Mar 23
2
[LLVMdev] Mails from IITH marked as spam
Dear Admin,
It seems that mails from our iit.ac.in domain are being marked as spam. It
would be nice if something could be done about this.
Best Regards
Ramakrishna
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Aditya Kamath <
adityakamath+llvmdev at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> (I received many emails that my posts were marked spam, so I am re-sending
> this from another email address
2024 Jul 18
2
[OT] Re: scattered thoughts on connection sharing
[sorry off-topic, ignore if uninterested in dmarc/dkim/mail filters]
On 2024/07/17 22:14, mark.yagnatinsky at barclays.com wrote:
> I don't know enough about DMARC to make any sense of what you just said... actually wait, maybe I get it.
> You're saying that email sent that I send to the list will land in your inbox with my address in the From header.
> But the recipient mail
2019 Sep 17
2
OT: DMARC / DKIM Failure Reports
Hi guys,
when I send e-mails to CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>, I received DMARC / DKIM failure reports. Is it possible to solve this problem and if so how?
This is the first report:
This is an email abuse report for an email message received from IP 208.100.23.70 on Tue, 17 Sep 2019 15:56:25 +0200.
The message below did not meet the sending domain's DMARC policy.
For
2019 Dec 04
2
Forcing TLS for SMTP?
I have a goal of securing email. Updated the company mail server and DNS
(CentOS 7 + Postfix, otherwise pretty stock) with support for SPF, DKIM, and
DMARC. So far, all good, and everything "just works".
Our mail server has supported SMTP / TLS for a long time, but recently I've
been considering requring TLS all the time.
Is there anybody here who's done this? Has it
2023 Jan 17
1
submission_host auth
Thanks for the reply, postfix + dovecot sasl configured and working properly. My question is about "adding dovecot authentication when sending emails via submission_host".
Let's say we have dovecot + sieve plugin container.
Dovecot configured to use remote SMTP submission host to send messages:
submission_host = postfix.example.com:587
User foo at example.com has the following