Webmail emails sent to myself rejected as Spam.

[#1]

I get a weekly email from Building magazine advising me the download link for the digital edition.
Usually I forward these to my work address (not Plusnet) from Outlook Express - today I decided to do it directly from RoundCube webmail.
I received a 552 rejection message - see attachment. I tried again - same thing
I've downloaded to OE and forwarded as usual - no problem; it arrived at work within seconds.
Please advise why Webmail forwarding is treated differently to OE forwarding and how to get round this restriction.

[#2]

Hi drj,
Which server do you have set for outgoing mail in OE? If you send through relay.plus.net the email is treated exactly the same as if you sent through webmail, so if you've got relay set in OE then we'll need to look into what's happening there.

[#3]

Just checked - yes, it's "relay.plus.net".
I've been forwarding these from OE every week since I joined PN in May 2011 without a problem - so that's working fine. I can't check resending from webmail because I've now downloaded it, so will have to try again next week if I remember.

[#4]

Thanks drj, please let us know how it goes - if there's a problem there we need to get investigating.

[#5]

I tried forwarding from Roundcube webmail with this week's version of the email - exactly the same type of rejection message - here's the header of the original email (not my forward):
Return-path: <subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk>
Envelope-to: drj@<my username>.plus.com
Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:59:38 +0000
Received: from [212.159.8.109] (helo=avasin07.plus.net)
    by inmx05.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1RqZEA-0003zJ-R6
    for drj@<my username>.plus.com; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:59:38 +0000
Received: from mailex.mailcore.me ([94.136.40.62])
    by avasin07.plus.net with Plusnet Cloudmark Gateway
    id SPzc1i0051LTyp201PzeHM; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:59:38 +0000
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=QqDcLCOd c=1 sm=1 a=ot4xXzeLieWMBlpof89aFw==:17
    a=pITVLu_iACAA:10 a=M7Ze8YdjUFAA:10 a=truz42aPAAAA:8 a=IURXqipvAAAA:8
    a=ck3sNJcIT84jBe6_le4A:9 a=tyweeMSlv4CXdR4de3AA:7 a=BgsWhQ65Pmd5cow3:21
    a=fd0UTiC2vUfhxO3i:21 a=dCz1nul5AAAA:8 a=EZrMZ3AAeBHKy-hYf7EA:9
    a=rHAwydHJVEGURiHSD18A:7 a=hWZ4JCsdG-0A:10 a=tYmk40QpwOUA:10
    a=5nfLcXBoWJxx6QHh:21 a=Fq1o2e0TPyEFC8qL:21 a=0AlMKuBX4/MHmI89XkK2kw==:117
Received: from mailer.cdsglobal-live.com ([78.33.8.113])
    by mail11.atlas.pipex.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
    (envelope-from <subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk>)
    id 1RqZE8-0004g2-1W
    for drj@<my domain name>.co.uk; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:59:36 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=notifire; d=mailer.subscription.co.uk;
    h=From:To:Date:Sender:Reply-to:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type; i=subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk;
    bh=xXuQB4E/JF51xrXZpxFMW0KJn5Y=;
    b=Pch4Dl+0s/qjC1iPOkmQcS61LlHCtTBOAOTSqw1wwaE+bjCm3FJlbv4uhKn6RYLwfzKlTzbXZpa2
    M4VlfqdAcxYRc1soparNajyNKKmqMgMMdyJhgeNtU8tv0epLXw4x
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; q=dns; s=notifire; d=mailer.subscription.co.uk;
    b=ZupFw4Cyn1CW3APb6ohkVUFsCBNqTnWDksHBg2pZua4ymdptiUgaZ+Tbmqi5XHocvUrUTFp5w5WS
    GgWHks+L+KaT0Eqr0WGWbLlQTQ9xd7uIca3Q3qInq5a5DjmKkUdp;
Received: by mailer.cdsglobal-live.com id h47k5a17smgl for <drj@<my domain name>.co.uk>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:57:04 +0000 (envelope-from <subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk>)
x-track-version: 4
x-track-source: notifire_cds_global
x-track-spooler-id: 37373
x-track-spooler-split-id: 37373
x-track-spooler-segment-id: 55990
x-track-contact-id: 74152434
From: "Building" <subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk>
To: "drj@<my domain name>.co.uk" <drj@<my domain name>.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:57:04 +0000
Sender: subscription@mailer.subscription.co.uk
Reply-to: Building <building@subscription.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
    boundary="b1_874edfaf5367e4de8b8be8c1db50d55c"
Message-ID: <E1RqZEA-0003zJ-R6@inmx05.plus.net>
X-PN-Virus-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00)
X-PN-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00)
Subject: Your 27th January Building digital edition is ready to view
I was forwarding last week and originally this week to my work email address. I've also now tried forwarding to my drj@<my domain name>.co.uk to which it was originally sent and get the same rejection message.
To rule out my domain name redirection service I've also tried forwarding to my base Plusnet address - drj@<my username>.plus.com - and I still get the same rejection message.
So something sent into me cannot be forwarded using Roundcube even internally within Plusnet to my own inbox never mind to my work address...
For information, I have just opened up Basic Webmail/SquirrelMail and tried forwarding to my work address from there. That went without a problem and arrived immediately.
The only issue I have with using SquirrelMail for forwarding (apart from the fact I don't use that facility any more since RoundCube is much better for most things) - and it's general not just in respect of this "rogue" email - is that it doesn't copy the subject line into the forwarding email as other email programs including RoundCube do.
Today's experience would seem to suggest the problem is specifically something to do with RoundCube.

[#6]

For info I've just tried again this week with this week's Building mag email - exactly the same - RoundCube immediately rejected with the same error message - SquirrelMail immediately sent and received at work.

[#7]

Quote from: drj

So something sent into me cannot be forwarded using Roundcube even internally within Plusnet to my own inbox never mind to my work address...

The email is getting rejected by our outbound anti-spam appliances. There's something in the body of the email it doesn't like. The headers are fine as I've checked those and there's nothing there that would trigger this rejection.

Quote from: drj

For information, I have just opened up Basic Webmail/SquirrelMail and tried forwarding to my work address from there. That went without a problem and arrived immediately.

That's a little worrying. SquirrelMail has a local Exim instance so would appear to accept the email without a rejection message but I wouldn't have expoected it to turn up at the other end.
Perhaps you can save a copy of the email you're trying to forward in HTML/EML format, zip it up and attach it to a support ticket so that I can take a look?

[#8]

Whilst PN are still examining the issue following my submission of one of the rogue emails, I can report that this week's example went through successfully.

[#9]

I replied to your support ticket a couple of days ago. The problem doesn't seem to be evident any more so there's little else for us to look into. My assumption is that it was one of the URLs in the body of the email that was falling foul of our anti-spam vendors content checks.

[#10]

Thanks - yes apologies I hadn't got round to reading that following my main computer suffering hard disk failure on Sunday.
I've now myself tried resending the stored 27 January one that originally bounced and it's gone through fine.
Strange though that until it resolved itself I could send from SM but not RC...
Hopefully this closes this problem.