You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Michael Scheidell <sc...@secnap.net> on 2006/07/21 19:44:58 UTC
[Fwd: Undeliverable:RE: Rule for mail contains bad email ids]
SA email admin?
Wondering why SA mailing list isn't using SRS or something.
Any mailing list subscriber who sends to the list could get their email
bounced at another list subscriber's if that list subscriber uses
HARDFAIL bounces and the list user has -all type spf records.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Undeliverable:RE: Rule for mail contains bad email ids
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:23:49 -0400
From: System Administrator <po...@secnap.com>
To: Michael Scheidell <sc...@secnap.net>
Your message
To: Ramprasad; spamassassin-users
Subject: RE: Rule for mail contains bad email ids
Sent: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:32:26 -0400
did not reach the following recipient(s):
users@spamassassin.apache.org on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:18:27 -0400
The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not
report a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it still
fails, contact your system administrator.
<potap01.accessintel.com #5.0.0 smtp;550 SPF forgery: Please see
http://www.openspf.org/why.html?sender=scheidell%40secnap.net&ip=12.145.
52.121&receiver=asf.osuosl.org>
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
SECNAP Network Security / www.secnap.com
scheidell@secnap.net / 1+561-999-5000, x 1131
Re: [Fwd: Undeliverable:RE: Rule for mail contains bad email ids]
Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> SA email admin?
>
> Wondering why SA mailing list isn't using SRS or something.
Really, who does. Besides SRS would be the wrong solution for a simple
mailing list.
> Any mailing list subscriber who sends to the list could get their email
> bounced at another list subscriber's if that list subscriber uses
> HARDFAIL bounces and the list user has -all type spf records.
Nope, apparently "potap01.accessintel.com" has x821 and x822 identities
confused as ezmlm correctly rewrites the envelope. It's the receivers
SPF implementation that is broken.
Daryl