Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.




1363 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

# 208517 15-Feb-2017 14:04
Send private message

We are beginnig to get calls from clients with SMX issues (and not just the pop timing out and horrible issues with old xtra mail).

 

Two issues: 1 - Emails rejected as SMX decided an SPF record without the explicit ip address or domain for the sender but with a ~all type ending - indicating allow other senders but in a grey sort of way meant dump all mail for that domain as it wasn't coming from te explicit ip given. Made a mess of the fact workers move around the country at times. So SPF now has accept all without caring who it comes from on the end of it. - Lessened security to allow basic emails to get through.

 

An email containing a 20 page PDF newsletter, with belmarrahealth.com as part of URL referencing an article on their website, got bounced by SMX and not delivered to their client that they host. That business will be missing out on work as it took three phone calls and a number of emails to get the simple email through with SMX.

 

They claim their upstream provider said belmarrahealth was compromised. Couldn't find it compromised in the 120 plus black lists I consulted. also have to ask the question, if SMX host mail for this company, what the hell are they doing sending it or referring ti to an upstream provider? Who is the upstream provider? SMX should be the end point.

 

SMX seem to be in such a flurry to not send spam and not be another yahoo that they are dumping legitimate mail all over the place. how about - first do no harm? Very under whelmed so far.

 

https://mxtoolbox.com/domain/belmarrahealth.com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





nunz

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
'That VDSL Cat'
10172 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2431

Trusted
Spark
Subscriber

  # 1725883 24-Feb-2017 20:11
Send private message

Per my comments in the other thread, has a case been raised for this?

 

I'm not asking to make you go through the process of backwards and forward, but would certainly appreciate being able to follow up IF things have not been handed correctly.

 

 

 

SPF issues are a whole different basket, and Do need to be raised directly to SMX.

 

SMX will not be another yahoo, spark have made this move due to how the whole yahoo ordeal was.





#include <std_disclaimer>

 

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.




1363 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

  # 1726162 25-Feb-2017 16:31
Send private message

hio77:

 

Per my comments in the other thread, has a case been raised for this?

 

I'm not asking to make you go through the process of backwards and forward, but would certainly appreciate being able to follow up IF things have not been handed correctly.

 

 

 

SPF issues are a whole different basket, and Do need to be raised directly to SMX.

 

SMX will not be another yahoo, spark have made this move due to how the whole yahoo ordeal was.

 

 

 

 

Yes.

 

We have to make our SPF less explicit and more general - meaning we are now giving a less certain indication of who is allowed to send as us - a step in the wrong direction we think

 

They allowed one email through so the newsletter could be sent to the printer but we are now having to encrypt our email to stop them calling a single link to a single article on a web site with thousands of pages on it - one of which may be spammy - from stopping a 23 page PDf being sent as it is spam.   Seriously - one link, non spam - maybe raise the spam score but not out right kill it. 

 

We notified the receiving printer SMX are banning emails to them and notified the organisation on ways to circumvent spam checking by hiding stuff from SMX.  The days of encryption keys is getting closer for the general populance.

 

 

 

Neither of these is anywhere near a good solution for anyone.

 

 

 

 





nunz

 
 
 
 




1363 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

  # 1726164 25-Feb-2017 16:33
Send private message

hio77:

 

Per my comments in the other thread, has a case been raised for this?

 

I'm not asking to make you go through the process of backwards and forward, but would certainly appreciate being able to follow up IF things have not been handed correctly.

 

 

 

SPF issues are a whole different basket, and Do need to be raised directly to SMX.

 

SMX will not be another yahoo, spark have made this move due to how the whole yahoo ordeal was.

 

 

 

 

You're right - they are already worse. Weeks without emails and a total shambles lasting months during the change over. Their name is worse than yahoos. did i mention the horrific server speeds and the BS we are going through dealing with non-spam being dumped as spam?

 

 

 

 





nunz

'That VDSL Cat'
10172 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2431

Trusted
Spark
Subscriber

  # 1726659 26-Feb-2017 20:21
Send private message

nunz:

 

 

 

You're right - they are already worse. Weeks without emails and a total shambles lasting months during the change over. Their name is worse than yahoos. did i mention the horrific server speeds and the BS we are going through dealing with non-spam being dumped as spam?

 

 

 

 

I will be very clear here, This is Highly misleading.

 

 

 

Until this week where SMALL batches of customers were moved across, Everyone was still on the yahoo service.

 

Nothing do with SMX unless YOU have migrated already. 





#include <std_disclaimer>

 

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.


1358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 319


  # 1726663 26-Feb-2017 20:50
Send private message

The mail delivery has already been switched over to SMX as of 2nd Feb so that includes the aspects nunz is complaining about if the outbound servers are rejecting his PDFs then it will be SMX scanning not Yahoo's and also bouncing of inbound messages back to source due to SPF or spam scoring will also be by SMX systems.

312 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 25

Lifetime subscriber

  # 1726704 26-Feb-2017 23:02
One person supports this post
Send private message

nunz:

 

Two issues: 1 - Emails rejected as SMX decided an SPF record without the explicit ip address or domain for the sender but with a ~all type ending - indicating allow other senders but in a grey sort of way meant dump all mail for that domain as it wasn't coming from te explicit ip given. Made a mess of the fact workers move around the country at times. So SPF now has accept all without caring who it comes from on the end of it. - Lessened security to allow basic emails to get through.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The best way to resolve this is have all staff send via your mail server (or another one) using authenticated SMTP over SSL or TLS so it all comes from the same place

 

Configure DKIM signing and look into DMARC while you're at it.

 

Anti spam providers use a huge range of measures to determine whether or not to block an email. I know with a few of the larger players, having an SPF soft-fail will increase the SPAM score a lot faster than a soft-pass. Using ~ for a soft-fail should really only be used for migrations.


1358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 319


  # 1726706 26-Feb-2017 23:08
Send private message

Or instead of you providing that server you can consider the likes of SMTP2GO.

353 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 55


  # 1726753 27-Feb-2017 00:03
One person supports this post
Send private message

having a look at that domain here

 

http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools#dnsReport|type=domain&&value=belmarrahealth.com

 

 

 

it doesn't have a pastmaster@ or abuse@

 

some email servers mark the email as spam if you dont have those 2 email adresses

 

and it has 2 sdf records

 

 

 

 




1363 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

  # 1726757 27-Feb-2017 00:13
Send private message

biggal:

 

having a look at that domain here

 

http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools#dnsReport|type=domain&&value=belmarrahealth.com

 

 

 

it doesn't have a pastmaster@ or abuse@

 

some email servers mark the email as spam if you dont have those 2 email adresses

 

and it has 2 sdf records

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No one is perfect. However to dump legitimate emails, from legitimate NZ organizations to other legitimate organizations where there is no history of spam in the sending or receiving org and there was ONE email with ONE link to ONE web page (non spam page)  in a 23 page PDF - that's extreme.

 

 





nunz



1363 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 281

Subscriber

  # 1726760 27-Feb-2017 00:17
Send private message

OmniouS:

 

nunz:

 

Two issues: 1 - Emails rejected as SMX decided an SPF record without the explicit ip address or domain for the sender but with a ~all type ending - indicating allow other senders but in a grey sort of way meant dump all mail for that domain as it wasn't coming from te explicit ip given. Made a mess of the fact workers move around the country at times. So SPF now has accept all without caring who it comes from on the end of it. - Lessened security to allow basic emails to get through.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The best way to resolve this is have all staff send via your mail server (or another one) using authenticated SMTP over SSL or TLS so it all comes from the same place

 

Configure DKIM signing and look into DMARC while you're at it.

 

Anti spam providers use a huge range of measures to determine whether or not to block an email. I know with a few of the larger players, having an SPF soft-fail will increase the SPAM score a lot faster than a soft-pass. Using ~ for a soft-fail should really only be used for migrations.

 

 

The person sending the email does send from one server - which has good spf records and is 99.9% of the time the only server used for sending mail from for that domain. no history of spam in sender or receiver - this was an out and out ban based on a single link referencing a single article (non spam)on a site in a 23 page PDF being sent for printing as a paper copy newsletter. Ridiculous ban.

 

 





nunz

105 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 12


  # 1729282 3-Mar-2017 09:06
Send private message

Well, yesterday xtra just rejected our newsletter and claiming it is spam. That's 4000+ customers with @xtra.co.nz that signed up with us over the 7 years.

 

All our newsletter is sending from 1 IP address and with SPF+DKIM, with well reputation rating over the years.


675 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 119


  # 1729299 3-Mar-2017 09:30
Send private message

I won't go into too much detail because I've posted on SMX many times before, but most of it all ties back to this extract (from their website):

 

"SMX guarantees 99.999% clean email delivered."

 

I am a firm believer that spam management should be in the control of the client. You can filter it into a folder, but you should not be blocking it except where you are 100% SURE it is spam. The above statement from SMX says it all, to meet their target they MUST employ over-reaching policy's and err on the side of blocking legitimate mail, I believe this is a very good reason to never touch them.


4039 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2780

Trusted

  # 1729346 3-Mar-2017 11:21
One person supports this post
Send private message

ArcticSilver:

 

I won't go into too much detail because I've posted on SMX many times before, but most of it all ties back to this extract (from their website):

 

"SMX guarantees 99.999% clean email delivered."

 

I am a firm believer that spam management should be in the control of the client. You can filter it into a folder, but you should not be blocking it except where you are 100% SURE it is spam. The above statement from SMX says it all, to meet their target they MUST employ over-reaching policy's and err on the side of blocking legitimate mail, I believe this is a very good reason to never touch them.

 

 

Up front, I don't use ISP email, haven't done for well over a decade... BUT...

 

Are you seriously saying you'd prefer to actually receive 100000 pieces of email to get the 1 that was miscategorised? If you are saying that, and you actually mean it, I reckon there's only 2 or 3 of you in the country, and you shouldn't be using any ISP email anyway.

 

Just think for a moment about the resource impacts on the provider of having to store maybe 30, 40 times as much as they currently do - and all the users having to download and store that much extra...

 

 

 

Sorry, it's entirely reasonable to filter spam in the provider, if not actually the only practical way to do it.

 

 

 

Cheers - N





--

 

Please note all comments are the product of my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.


602 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 127


  # 1729351 3-Mar-2017 11:35
One person supports this post
Send private message

Talkiet:

 

ArcticSilver:

 

I won't go into too much detail because I've posted on SMX many times before, but most of it all ties back to this extract (from their website):

 

"SMX guarantees 99.999% clean email delivered."

 

I am a firm believer that spam management should be in the control of the client. You can filter it into a folder, but you should not be blocking it except where you are 100% SURE it is spam. The above statement from SMX says it all, to meet their target they MUST employ over-reaching policy's and err on the side of blocking legitimate mail, I believe this is a very good reason to never touch them.

 

 

Up front, I don't use ISP email, haven't done for well over a decade... BUT...

 

Are you seriously saying you'd prefer to actually receive 100000 pieces of email to get the 1 that was miscategorised? If you are saying that, and you actually mean it, I reckon there's only 2 or 3 of you in the country, and you shouldn't be using any ISP email anyway.

 

Just think for a moment about the resource impacts on the provider of having to store maybe 30, 40 times as much as they currently do - and all the users having to download and store that much extra...

 

 

 

Sorry, it's entirely reasonable to filter spam in the provider, if not actually the only practical way to do it.

 

 

 

Cheers - N

 

 

 

 

I think he means he would prefer them to have 99.95% accuracy, let 1 or 2 spam through and not block any legitimate e-mail, than promise 99.999% and have legitimate e-mail be caught up in the net

 

Clint


1724 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 415


  # 1729366 3-Mar-2017 12:04
Send private message

ArcticSilver:

 

 

 

I am a firm believer that spam management should be in the control of the client.

 

 

I 100% agree . The client should have that option (note , option)
There should be an option to opt out of the spam filter .

 

However, yahoo also did not give the option to opt out of spam filtering

 

Given its a freebee service, perhaps they are just setting things up as easily & quickly as poss ?
Freebee, take what they give you I guess .

 

 

 

""SMX guarantees 99.999% clean email delivered.""
Who here actually believes that claim ? Just marketing nonsense ?
Most of the time , users wont know when a legit email has been blocked .


 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Techweek starting around NZ today
Posted 20-May-2019 09:52


Porirua City Council first to adopt new council software solution Datascape
Posted 15-May-2019 12:00


New survey provides insight into schools' technology challenges and plans
Posted 15-May-2019 09:30


Apple Music now available on Alexa devices in Australia and New Zealand
Posted 15-May-2019 09:11


Make a stand against cyberbullying this Pink Shirt Day
Posted 14-May-2019 20:23


Samsung first TV manufacturer to launch the Apple TV App and Airplay 2
Posted 14-May-2019 20:11


Vodafone New Zealand sold
Posted 14-May-2019 07:25


Kordia boosts cloud performance with locally-hosted Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 10:25


Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute in New Zealand opens up faster, more secure internet for Kiwi businesses
Posted 8-May-2019 09:39


Vocus Communications to deliver Microsoft Azure Cloud Solutions through Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 09:25


Independent NZ feature film #statusPending to premiere during WLG-X
Posted 6-May-2019 22:13


The ultimate dog photoshoot with Nokia 9 PureView #ForgottenDogsofInstagram
Posted 6-May-2019 09:41


Nokia 9 PureView available in New Zealand
Posted 6-May-2019 09:06


Motorola Solutions joins local partners to deliver advanced communications network in New Zealand
Posted 30-Apr-2019 21:50


Micron launches high-performance NVMe SSDs for cloud and enterprise markets
Posted 30-Apr-2019 10:27



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.