Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

Some legitimate email servers are configured wrong. I've seen some-to-many
with no MX records at all, or MX records pointing at their webmail server
(with no smtp).

So, logically..outbound mail servers may not conform to RFCs either.


"Patrick Farrell" <pfarrell@packereng.com> wrote in message
news:7AWim.4405$7G7.3618@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> Craig wrote:
>> Given what a large % of people have bad records I can't see how it would
>> not lose legit email. But Marc says it works for him, so that's good
>> enough for me. Let us know if it works, would ya? 🙂
>>

> Well I guess it's a question of mail server design. If you have 3 mx
> records, 10 20 30 and 20 is the good one and 10 and 30 are bogus, does the
> mail server continue to try 20 and then 30?
>
> They should, otherwise what's the point of having multiple MX records as
> they would never fail over in the event one was down.
>



0 Likes
grimlock1 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

Craig wrote:
> Some legitimate email servers are configured wrong. I've seen some-to-many
> with no MX records at all, or MX records pointing at their webmail server
> (with no smtp).
>
> So, logically..outbound mail servers may not conform to RFCs either.


Actually that premise isn't logical.

Faulty mx records is a misconfiguration by the mail administrator and a
totally separate issue. A mail server that doesn't check the other mx
records however suffers from bad coding. I've never seen one with a
setting that lets you turn off checking multiple mx records.
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

Oh yeah...there's all kinds of ways. Exhibit A: the introduction of spam
and virus appliances...(think: barracuda)

The IT people who don't understand email (and they are legion) toss these
things out in front of their mail server with abandon. The same box is
often configured to do inbound and outbound email. They tweak it (or not)
and screw it all up.

I've personally seen mail get rejected to my office when the primary mx is
down. Dumb, yes.


"Patrick Farrell" <pfarrell@packereng.com> wrote in message
news:Ak4jm.4536$7G7.4125@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> Craig wrote:
>> Some legitimate email servers are configured wrong. I've seen
>> some-to-many with no MX records at all, or MX records pointing at their
>> webmail server (with no smtp).
>>
>> So, logically..outbound mail servers may not conform to RFCs either.

>
> Actually that premise isn't logical.
>
> Faulty mx records is a misconfiguration by the mail administrator and a
> totally separate issue. A mail server that doesn't check the other mx
> records however suffers from bad coding. I've never seen one with a
> setting that lets you turn off checking multiple mx records.



0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

Tried this briefly, then discovered that quite a few legit mail servers
apparently ignore the precedence of your records and may also hard fail
after trying just one server.

Patrick Farrell wrote:

> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks
>
> Anyone ever try that? How did it work for you?

0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

That's what I said! 🙂

"£Jim" <nospam@any.invalid> wrote in message
news:6qijm.4763$7G7.4417@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> Tried this briefly, then discovered that quite a few legit mail servers
> apparently ignore the precedence of your records and may also hard fail
> after trying just one server.
>
> Patrick Farrell wrote:
>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks
>>
>> Anyone ever try that? How did it work for you?



0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

And I'm agreeing!
Didn't take long to notice either so I assume there's a lot of poorly
configured servers. Everyone please check your configuration, thank you
😉

Craig wrote:

> That's what I said! 🙂
>
> "£Jim" <nospam@any.invalid> wrote in message
> news:6qijm.4763$7G7.4417@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> > Tried this briefly, then discovered that quite a few legit mail
> > servers apparently ignore the precedence of your records and may
> > also hard fail after trying just one server.
> >
> > Patrick Farrell wrote:
> >
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks
> > >
> > > Anyone ever try that? How did it work for you?

0 Likes
dzanre1 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Fake MX records and spam

Craig wrote:

> Given what a large % of people have bad records I can't see how it would
> not lose legit email. But Marc says it works for him, so that's good
> enough for me. Let us know if it works, would ya? 🙂


I have watched two mail servers side by side, and watched spam come directly
into the lower priority mail server, so I'm not sure it does any good at all
really. There are many spammers out there who purposefully avoid the first
record, assuming that it's protected, but others will not be.

--
Danita
Novell Knowledge Partner
Moving GroupWise to Linux?
http://www.caledonia.net/gwmove.html
0 Likes
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.