Postini Email Security Trial
Quote from: Oldjim Another factor about using Postini is that it stops all the spam which used to be sent direct to mail servers such as mxlast - and there is a lot of that.
I thought that the lack of spam via mxlast was because because you opted to not have it delivered to you.
Surely that could have been done without having the Postini trial - if PlusNet have wanted to allow it.
For hosted domains I think you can remove mx.last yourself.
I'm not sure about removal of mx.last for username.plus.com
I'm not sure about removal of mx.last for username.plus.com
I'm guessing that you are thinking of the fact that only the mx.core servers were behind Criticalpath, never mx.last - but as Critical path has been removed that doesn't apply. I don't think there is any difference now.
Quote from: pwebb As previously requested, please provide any evidence to us so that we can investigate and resolve the issue. I am aware that some of the scores on the forum notifications are low and were working on that, and others you have send them over and we can look at them too.
As you already know, the sole reason I signed up to the trial on one specific A/C was to conduct tests for possible problems that could affect me when my main A/C gets switched over. You can therefore be 100% certain of getting evidence when I have something that I believe provides proof beyond reasonable doubt that a problem exists.
I'm quite sure that you realise that getting irrefutable evidence when 3rd parties are involved is difficult at best and especially so when bounces/rejections are not necessarily being sent but I can assure you that there is a somewhat suspicious lack of certain messages being received via the postini service that are being received by my main A/C. I have a number of duplicated daily/weekly/monthly messages being sent to both A/Cs and so far some are conspicuous by their absence on the postini A/C.
Of course, there could be 101 other reasons why they are apparently missing so after only a couple of weeks or thereabouts on postini I don't really have sufficient data to provide evidence beyond doubt ... but I will say that something somewhere isn't quite right and it is not entirely unreasonable to suggest that the probability of more than 1 organisation not sending messages is perhaps somewhat less than the probability of 1 organisation not receiving and/or delivering them !
Quote I can confirm with 100% certainty (as I've just checked) that messages are alway rejected with a 5xx error and not quietly dumped.
And I can confirm with 100% certainty that postini are most definitely dumping rather than rejecting some (but not necessarily all) messages they consider as spam !! When I send 'dubious' test messages DIRECT to the postini servers (i.e. not via the PN relay server) but they are NOT delivered to my PN A/C AND they are NOT rejected by postini either, what other possible explanation is there when this has happened on a repeatable basis ? I get rejections in other circumstances (such as for an invalid destination etc.) but not when the message is being classified as spam.
There is no debate to be had - it is (or at least was because my tests were a week or so ago and I haven't tried again recently) a proven fact that postini were/are accepting but not delivering messages under certain circumstances.
What evidence do you want or expect to see ? I can provide message IDs of messages that could only be reliably delivered to my A/C by bypassing postini if you have access to detailed logs going back far enough to check what happened but other than that there is obviously nothing else. The fact that messages are clearly being accepted but not being delivered speaks for itself TBH.
Quote from: Bob Whoever the manager is for the Postini trial should surely on return from New Year break, provide an uptodate situation summary.
There seems to be a very great deal of confusion with regard to what is happening. There seems to be a deal of PlusNet ignoring that there are serious problems or not knowing what to do or say.
I may have missed them, but I don't think the thread has been ignored, nor questions ignored? Can you perhaps let me know what you think is missing and I'll be happy to get the answers.
Quote from: Bob Is the situation being deliberately ignored. If so then someone must have issued instructions for problems to be left unanswered.
I wonder if my assumption is correct?? Yesterday (1st Jan 2008) I submitted a question (23763186) at 8.38 am regarding a problem with an email. When submitting it there was an indication that rreplies were taking about three and a half hours. So far my question has not had any reply at all. That question cannot have been lost can it?
I've just looked at the question and see it was answered earlier this morning. There have been no instructions to anyone to ignore questions, it would make no sense for us to ignore possible issues with a system we are trialing.
The other thing to note from your ticket is that Postini correctly classified the message as Not spam, but dspam got it wrong and classified it as spam.
Quote from: Bob I'm sorry if I'm a complaining old git, but someone fairly senior in PlusNet needs to get a firm grip, on what seems to be a totally confused b**** up. I'm not looking for heads to roll, but for someone to get the thing sorted out and fairly soon. Is there anyone out there? Where are you?
Oh by the way, Happy New Year!
I'm not sure why you think we are making a mess of this, and what you think we need to sort? So far I've put a lot of my time into this, which I've done because I am keen that we resolve any and all issues before the full rollout.
Happy New Year to you too
Phil
Quote from: Total <snip>
Within 14 days this had increased again and today the number marked spam must be reaching 600 plus, and approximately 50 getting through to my inbox.
<snip>
My own domain e-mail when sent to another PN account was going through Postini, which would indicate that it is sent out of PN infrastructure to be received again.
Headers from external (to PN) e-mail, showed that not all was going through postini. Much marked Spam had not taken the postini route.
To get a clearer picture we could really do with knowing what percentage of spam is being caught by postini, and what percentage is being caught by Despam afterwards. In my case 50 getting through to my inbox is too much, and I would have thought that Postini would have caught a larger percentage; or has it and they are passed onto Despam for marking as Spam. The problem is that when you have large quantities marked spam it's easy to miss the legitimate e-mail that has also been marked as spam.
I notice that more items that are legitimate are now being marked Spam. (I do use the Despam not spam/spam facility) Good thing I kept the PN spam box going as if not I would ahve lost some important e-mails.
I assume you were not one of the Postini trialists who asked for mx.last and mx.core to reject mail sent direct to the old MX records? I've had that turned on and it has made a dramatic difference. When commenting upon the numbers of spam getting through you need to think in terms of just those that have come through Postini as the blocking of mx.core and mx.last will eventually be turned on for everyone.
DSPAM has gone totally pear-shaped in the last few weeks - I've turned it off as it was proving worse than useless. In fact the presence of the Postini headers seems to be totally confusing DSPAM and making it worse than ever (NB Postini scoring is not directly used in the marking of subjects as [-SPAM-]).
I now have rules based on the headers added by Postini - the identification of spam by Postini is proving remarkably accurate (with one notable exception - over half of notification emails from these forums are marked as spam).