[aprssig] aprssig Digest, Vol 212, Issue 21 (List email problems)

[Greg Troxel]

John Ackermann N8UR <jra at febo.com> writes:

> On 2/18/22 12:00 PM, aprssig-request at lists.tapr.org wrote:
>
> The issue we're dealing with has been affecting folks on the other
> lists.tapr.org lists; I don't know how many people on aprssig are
> affected by it.
>
> People who have Microsoft as their email service provider are being
> blocked from getting messages from lists.tapr.org.  The bounce
> messages say:
>
> "Access denied, banned sender[173.230.155.76]. To request removal from
> this list please forward this message to
> delist at messaging.microsoft.com. For more information please go to
> http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=526653. AS(1410)
> [SY4AUS01FT004.eop-AUS01.prod.protection.outlook.com]"
>
> We have submitted several requests for delisting, and our ISP has been
> doing everything they can (we are not the only one of their customers
> having this problem), but so far nothing has gotten MSFT to unblock
> us. Changing IP addresses is one way to circumvent the problem.

I've been running my own mail server for years, and also running
spamassassin.  The world is messy and this is my perspective from
dealing with incorrect blocking.  (If a user signed up for the list,
blocking it is incorrect, as spam is by definition unsolicited bulk
mail.)

Some organizations that provide mail to users are just unreasonable.
I've had trouble with yahoo refusing mail from my server (not listed
anywhere, not even incorrectly listed), and they were unwilling/unable
to provide any explanation.  In fact, I felt like I was not able to
actually communicate in that they kept treating me like a bulk mailer
with "deliverability" concerns, even though I was quite clear this was a
small personal server sending actual personal mail, and there was no
language barrier.

So Microsoft appears out of line here, and I personally would arrive at
"tell people with microsoft email to change to a mail provider that is
willing to deliver mail they want to receive".

In this case, the listing is UCEPROTECT-Level3 which means that whoever
these uceprotect people are, think that there are spammers at the same
VPS provider and it's not getting fixed:

  https://www.uceprotect.net/en/rblcheck.php

By this logic, I should just block everything from gmail because they
keep letting people sign up who spam.

Generally, spam filtering is a complicated process, with points for
various things, scores and thresholds.  It is generally not considered
ok to fully reject for being on lists like this; the level1 list (actual
spam from that IP addresss recently) would be reasonable.

I do not consider a hard-reject on uceprotect-level3 to be at all
reasonable unless the individuals opt into it.

linode should either be keeping their house in order or publish an
explanation of why UCEPROTECT is wrong.  Looking briefly:

  https://www.linode.com/community/questions/20952/linode-blacklisted-on-uceprotect-rbl

it seems to be that UCEPROTECT is a bit unreasonable and that it is
totally not recommended or reasonable for a regular ISP to use
UCEPROTECTL3.  So regardless of whether linode is good enough about
terminating spammers, I think Microsoft is wrong here to be using it.

73 de n1dam
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20220218/d3a5844e/attachment.asc>