Slightly OT: How do you deal with domains you forward to who
consider you a spammer based in user reports?
Furnish, Trever G
TGFurnish at herffjones.com
Mon Apr 30 22:34:36 IST 2007
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info
> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of DAve
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 5:01 PM
> To: MailScanner discussion
> Subject: Re: Slightly OT: How do you deal with domains you
> forward to who consider you a spammer based in user reports?
> An exasperating situation. We have been dealing with the same
> issue for quite a awhile. Our current solution is to use
> verp, if AOL returns the message in a scomp report we remove
> the users email address and add it to a subscriber black
> list. That email address is never allowed to subscribe to
> another mail list we host. So far, no client has complained,
> AOL is happy, our scomp reports have plummeted.
Are you using verp only in conjunction with mailing lists?
Unfortunately my forwards aren't going through any kind of mailing list
manager -- they're just coming in and getting forwarded immediately back
out, since each address goes to an individual. The forwards were set up
so that outside sales reps who don't pick up mail from out systems could
still have a "company" email address -- a practice I'm hoping to end,
but which I expect to continue.
> You might see if there is a way to inject something into the
> headers that AOL will no redact. Then, if the user reports
> their forwarded mail as spam, simply stop forwarding.
That might actually make a big difference. Any ideas on how to
implement it, short of placing a footer in the body of the message?
I've noted that aol "redacts" anything that looks like an email address
in the headers, but not the body, but if I could insert a header that
says, for example, "X-HJ-MailScanner-To: foo at foo dot com", they
probably wouldn't redact that. I suppose I could modify that bit of
code in mailscanner that adds that header...hmmm... Painful for
upgrades, but better than nothing...
> Not the
> best solution business wise, but the safe option for certain.
> If the user wants the authority to declare spam/not spam,
> they should be responsible for the actions they set into motion.
> In the end we all want to make the client happy, but
> protecting your network must come first. You can't make a
> client happy if no one will accept your server's mail.
Good points and it's nice to know I'm not the only one who feels that
> > How do you handle mail that you forward? As I see it my
> only options
> > for dealing with aol are:
> As above, if AOL sends an scomp report, the forward stops
> This has happened only twice. Both time I sent the report to
> the client and explained the situation. There have been no
> repeat incidents.
> Good luck,
Thanks for the response, DAve.
More information about the MailScanner