Hi all,
One of my users sent email someone and received a rejected notice. Here it is:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejected content,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895 (m6F1MY037314479000)
The attachments being sent were a 38 KB Excel file, and 1 MB PowerPoint.
I understand that SURBL checks for websites and URLs inside the email, but I can't seem to find anything about SURBL lists rejecting content. I'm inquiring as we need to make sure these attachments get to the recipient.
Thanks,
Will
Ask the postmaster for mx01.lastspam.com [64.15.150.3] for more information. Their error message is pretty vague. Maybe their system log has an explanation.
Joseph Brennan Columbia University Information Technology
--On Friday, July 16, 2010 12:52 -0700 "Shattuck, Will" wshattuck@paramountfarms.com wrote:
Hi all,
One of my users sent email someone and received a rejected notice. Here it is:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejectedcontent,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895(m6F1MY037314479000)
The attachments being sent were a 38 KB Excel file, and 1 MB PowerPoint.
I understand that SURBL checks for websites and URLs inside the email, but I can't seem to find anything about SURBL lists rejecting content. I'm inquiring as we need to make sure these attachments get to the recipient.
Thanks,
Will
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Hi!
Ask the postmaster for mx01.lastspam.com [64.15.150.3] for more information. Their error message is pretty vague. Maybe their system log has an explanation.
Looks perhaps like a odd reject but the URL is inside there:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejectedcontent,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895(m6F1MY037314479000)
2010.in
SURBL Lookup Result: 2010.in is on SURBL lists: JP
I understand that SURBL checks for websites and URLs inside the email, but I can't seem to find anything about SURBL lists rejecting content. I'm inquiring as we need to make sure these attachments get to the recipient.
Either the guys at lastspam.com use the filter in a wrong way or the url was really inside the e-mail.
Cough, its a filter vendor using SURBL and they didnt sign up as far as i can tell. We'll give them a nudge anyway ;)
Bye, Raymond.
"Raymond Dijkxhoorn" raymond@prolocation.net wrote in message news:alpine.LFD.2.00.1007181932340.2960@noc.prolocation.net...
Hi!
Ask the postmaster for mx01.lastspam.com [64.15.150.3] for more information. Their error message is pretty vague. Maybe their system log has an explanation.
Looks perhaps like a odd reject but the URL is inside there:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejectedcontent,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895(m6F1MY037314479000)
2010.in
With a URL like that, I'd wager that it was written as part of regular text and not intended to be a URL at all. For example, if the email contained a phrase along the lines of the following (just a random example I made up):
"Sales have risen in 2010.In the following year they should rise even more."
Note the lack of a space after the full stop turns "2010.In" into a domain name when in fact it shouldn't be.
Cheers, Jeremy
Hi!
Looks perhaps like a odd reject but the URL is inside there:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejectedcontent,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895(m6F1MY037314479000)
2010.in
With a URL like that, I'd wager that it was written as part of regular text and not intended to be a URL at all. For example, if the email contained a phrase along the lines of the following (just a random example I made up):
"Sales have risen in 2010.In the following year they should rise even more."
Note the lack of a space after the full stop turns "2010.In" into a domain name when in fact it shouldn't be.
Meaning the software using the SURBL data does a bad job ;)
The domain in question is expired from SURBL however we will try to contact lastspam.com and see what was wrong there.
Thanks, Raymond.
On 7/19/10, Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@prolocation.net wrote:
Hi!
Looks perhaps like a odd reject but the URL is inside there:
host mx01.lastspam.com[64.15.150.3] said: 550-5.7.1 rejectedcontent,
black listed 2010.In by multi.surbl.org. #762 #895(m6F1MY037314479000)
2010.in
With a URL like that, I'd wager that it was written as part of regular text and not intended to be a URL at all. For example, if the email contained a phrase along the lines of the following (just a random example I made up):
"Sales have risen in 2010.In the following year they should rise even more."
Note the lack of a space after the full stop turns "2010.In" into a domain name when in fact it shouldn't be.
Meaning the software using the SURBL data does a bad job ;)
The domain in question is expired from SURBL however we will try to contact lastspam.com and see what was wrong there.
FWIW It looks like 2010.in was never blacklisted on SURBLs. So there may be another problem with the application.
On 7/19/10, Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@prolocation.net wrote:
Meaning the software using the SURBL data does a bad job ;)
The domain in question is expired from SURBL however we will try to contact lastspam.com and see what was wrong there.
FWIW It looks like 2010.in was never blacklisted on SURBLs. So there may be another problem with the application.
Hi all,
Thanks for help. It did appear to me to be an issue on the recipient's mail server.
Will
Hi!
Meaning the software using the SURBL data does a bad job ;)
The domain in question is expired from SURBL however we will try to contact lastspam.com and see what was wrong there.
FWIW It looks like 2010.in was never blacklisted on SURBLs. So there may be another problem with the application.
It was blacklisted. I pasted the search results also in the thread earlier on. It was listed on JP and expired 3 days ago.
Bye, Raymond.
On 7/19/10, Raymond Dijkxhoorn raymond@prolocation.net wrote:
Hi!
Meaning the software using the SURBL data does a bad job ;)
The domain in question is expired from SURBL however we will try to contact lastspam.com and see what was wrong there.
FWIW It looks like 2010.in was never blacklisted on SURBLs. So there may be another problem with the application.
It was blacklisted. I pasted the search results also in the thread earlier on. It was listed on JP and expired 3 days ago.
Yes, you're right, it was listed before
-
Jeremy Fairbrass -
Joseph Brennan -
Raymond Dijkxhoorn -
Shattuck, Will -
SURBL Role