Plusnet server on Trend blacklist

[#1]

As I'm to only user of this account,  I don't see why I should have to create a different mailbox which will have to be set up identically to my current mailbox (i.e.  catch all) purely to get around Plusnets insecure design.
Also, while that trick  (username+mailbox) might work for preventing the entire account being compromised,  it still doesn't stop the mail account being compromised.
If I want to be really secure,  it looks like I'll be setting up my own servers to provide secure access.

[#2]

Quote from: Chris

Indeed, but we need the full error message on a ticket from the account having the issue. The team that will look at the ticket don't work on the forums!

I raised a ticket about it on Tuesday.

Quote from: Bob

That's *our* relay servers rejecting the message because the URL in question matches one of Cloudmark's spam fingerprint. So this is us rejecting messages because Cloudmark has identified spam messages containing that URL or originating from an email address associated with the same domain. So when another company blocks us it's us that gets flak for it, and when we block another company it's us that gets flak for it. Seems like you can't win when it comes to spam detection Anyway, I'll have a look at getting the reputation of that URL reset by Cloudmark. It's nothing to do with the Trend situation and discussing it in this thread is likely to start confusing matters.

I'm sorry for raising another problem in this thread. I didn't realise it was unrelated at the time.

Quote from: Bob

Quote from: Anotherone It's this http://www.holbornwhippet.com/ that it doesn't like  This should now be fixed.

Thanks. I've updated the ticket. I'll be going to the Holborn Whippet for a few pints tonight.

[#3]

Quote from: kmilburn

As I'm to only user of this account,  I don't see why I should have to create a different mailbox which will have to be set up identically to my current mailbox (i.e.  catch all) purely to get around Plusnets insecure design. Also, while that trick  (username+mailbox) might work for preventing the entire account being compromised,   it still doesn't stop the mail account being compromised.

You really haven't understood the suggestion.
In your mail client you have to separately set up the incoming (POP3 or IMAP) and outgoing mail mail servers (SMTP) - each can specify the credentials.
All you do is create a new mailbox which will NEVER receive any incoming mail. You then put that account (username will be yourusername+mailbox and the password you create) against the SMTP server. You DON'T change your email address when sending emails (so all the replies come back to your existing mailboxes) and you don't create a new account in your mail client so you still have the same folders as at present with all your emails in and out.

[#4]

To make emal using a smartphone, laptop, etc useful requires the ability to send and receive email,  only obfuscating the sending side (SMTP) does not mitigate the risk when the credentials for the receiving side (IMAP) are also sent in the clear!
Either both need to use a mailbox (the same one or different) which is not default mailbox, or both SMTP and IMAP require encryption.

[#5]

Think Bob Pullen quoted yesterday "1 in 8" chance?? Well I've tried emailing my wife at her NHS addy 5 times in 30 minutes this morning ...and everyone has bounced as undeliverable! Don't think I have managed to email her successfully now for ~ 2 weeks?
Oh well..back to Yahoo webmail!!!

[#6]

I managed to email my daughter yesterday at her NHS address, first attempt bounced but second worked fine.

[#7]

I've also managed to e-mail successfully to NHS addresses yesterday and today. 

[#8]

Oh dear!  I was able to send to NHS addresses last week but this morning they are bouncing again.  Do we have any further update on this problem?

[#9]

Access to the NHS is being blocked yet again
A message that you sent to the following recipient could not be delivered due to a permanent error. ** The remote server 62.208.144.158 responded with: **
xxxxx@xxx.nhs.uk
550:5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [84.93.230.244] blocked using Trend Micro RBL+. Please see http://www.mail-abuse.com/cgi-bin/lookup?ip_address=84.93.230.244; Mail from 84.93.230.244 blocked using Trend Micro Email Reputation database. Please see <http://www.mail-abuse.com/cgi-bin/lookup?84.93.230.244>

[#10]

Yes, my access to the NHS is blocked again too after working for a few days!!   

[#11]

I have just tried to email a colleague at a University and it is STILL failing. 
This issue has now been with us for about two weeks and shows no tangible signs of moving towards resolution any time soon.
When will we see a resolution (even the overdue progress report would be nice)?

[#12]

Ask Trend!

[#13]

Morning folks,
Unless I've made a mistake doing the lookups it seems to me that only a single outbound mail server is listed now?
avasout01 - 84.93.230.227
avasout02 - 212.159.14.17
avasout03 - 84.93.230.244 *
avasout04 - 212.159.14.19
avasout05 - 84.93.230.250
avasout06 - 212.159.14.18
avasout07 - 84.93.230.235
avasout08 - 212.159.14.20
That means you should theoretically have a seven in eight chance of an email getting through?
Edit: amended closing statement to correct my folly

[#14]

Surely you mean the reverse - a one in eight chance of it bouncing (or 7 in 8 of getting through).

[#15]

Doh!