From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 23 22:46:42 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19644106564A for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:46:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dead_line@hotmail.com) Received: from snt0-omc2-s40.snt0.hotmail.com (snt0-omc2-s40.snt0.hotmail.com [65.54.61.91]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E194E8FC0A for ; Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from SNT103-W52 ([65.55.90.71]) by snt0-omc2-s40.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 23 Oct 2010 15:46:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [94.128.46.171] From: Marwan Sultan To: Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:46:40 +0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <4CBFD2AE.7080402@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: , <4CBFD2AE.7080402@infracaninophile.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2010 22:46:41.0007 (UTC) FILETIME=[28B2EFF0:01CB7304] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: RE: My mail server flagged spam! X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:46:42 -0000 Dear Dr. Matthew.=2C =20 When my client or any clients uses the web mail that i have configured= =2C=20 then everything works fine NO spam problems and email will be received by hotmail=2C gmail and vise versa. =20 I found out that this particular client complaining because they use outlook express NOT the web mail. =20 they configure their outlook express to use SMTP user/password with mail.clinet_domain.com as incoming/outgoing. =20 even if they send from xyz@client_domain to admin@MyDomain.com both are in same server=2C I will still receive it as SPAM. (They are sending from outlook.) =20 looking at spam log=2C and why its scored as spam.. here is a copy. =20 pts rule name description=20 ---- ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------= ---=20 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL=20 [95.66.68.100 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]=20 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message=20 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%=20 [score: 0.5019]=20 2.2 TVD_SPACE_RATIO BODY: TVD_SPACE_RATIO=20 0.1 RDNS_NONE Delivered to trusted network by a host with no r= DNS=20 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers=20 =20 =20 As you see 2.8 for DOS_OE_TO_MX and 2.2 for TVD_SPACE_RATIO =20 I have looked for DOS_OE_TO_MX and it says because client is sending "directly" to MX records? well! i asked them to use "mail.server_name.com" for income/outgoing for outlook express..but still the same error and email is scored as spam. =20 Any help is highly appreciate it. =20 - Marwan =20 > Date: Thu=2C 21 Oct 2010 06:42:06 +0100 > From: m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk > To: dead_line@hotmail.com > CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: My mail server flagged spam! >=20 > On 21/10/2010 01:10=2C Marwan Sultan wrote: > > if I check that domain in mxtoolbox.com > > it complains "Warning - Reverse DNS does not match SMTP Banner" > > could it be the SMTP banner flagging the mail as spam? >=20 > This is certainly possible. It would add spam points on my servers. >=20 > The address in question is the one presented by your mail server during > the SMTP dialogue -- the first line it sends in fact. Something like this= : >=20 > EHLO smtp.example.com >=20 > By default it will use the hostname of your server=2C but you can overrid= e > that. >=20 > It is this address that you have to be really strict about: the address > should resolve to the IP that the server connects via (not necessarily > the IP of the server if there are NAT gateways involved)=2C and a reverse > lookup of that IP should return the name again. >=20 > This name used in the EHLO banner doesn't have to be anything to do with > the addresses on the e-mail=2C except in as far as either side is using > SPF and you have chosen to add that information to the SPF selector(s). > SPF seems to be going out of favour now=2C and sensible mail admins > didn't make accept/deny decisions entirely on pass/fail of SPF tests=2C > but still=2C for best results with a mail system=2C you should take care = to > get that right. >=20 > Cheers=2C >=20 > Matthew >=20 > --=20 > Dr Matthew J Seaman MA=2C D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard > Flat 3 > PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate > JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent=2C CT11 9PW >=20 =