[178015] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: gmail spam help
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Helms)
Thu Feb 12 11:10:12 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <748ed49076164b8b97b38a0b0dff0b95@exch2013-1.hq.nac.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:06:34 -0500
From: Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com>
To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Alex,
I won't begin to claim to know the root cause behind this, but "I own it"
isn't a good reason to say that no spam has come from it, indeed it's not
even a reason to say that a great amount of spam hasn't come from it.
The only way Google allows contact on these issues is via this form:
https://support.google.com/mail/contact/msgdelivery
I also see that your domain is listed by http://www.squidblacklist.org/
http://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=3Dblacklist%3acorp.nac.net&run=
=3Dtoolpage
Clearly it's not just Google that sees some issues, but your domain doesn't
appear to be on any other email black lists, which generally means that a
machine(s) on your network is/was compromised and being used in a phishing
attack.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net> wrote=
:
> Mainly because I own it, and the people who use it. The server has been
> around 10+ years and has tight oversight. SPF is proper. This is a recent
> issue.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Scott Helms [mailto:khelms@zcorum.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 12, 2015 10:51 AM
> *To:* Alex Rubenstein
> *Cc:* Josh Luthman; NANOG list
> *Subject:* Re: gmail spam help
>
>
>
> I'd be interested to know how you can be so adamant about the lack of spa=
m
> from this specific server. A great percentage of the spam hitting server=
s
> I have visibility into comes from very similar kinds of set ups because
> they tend to have little or no over sight in place.
>
>
>
> Also, lots of commercial email gets flagged as spam by users, even when
> they opted in for the email. If enough people flagged email from this
> server as spam it will cause Google to consider other email from the same
> small server as likely to be spam as well. Small systems, especially new
> ones, tend to unintentionally look like spam sources by not having proper
> reverse records, making sure you have SPF set up for the domain, etc.
>
>
>
>
> Scott Helms
> Vice President of Technology
> ZCorum
> (678) 507-5000
> --------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
> --------------------------------
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Alex Rubenstein <alex@corp.nac.net>
> wrote:
>
> I should have been clearer.
>
> I have been getting complaints from my sales folks that when they send
> emails to people who use gmail (either a gmail account or google apps) th=
at
> they recipient is reporting that the email is ending up in the Spam folde=
r.
> So, I tested this myself, sending an email from alex@corp.nac.net<mailto:
> alex@corp.nac.net> to rubenstein45@gmail.com<mailto:rubenstein45@gmail.co=
m
> >
>
> [cid:image001.png@01D046AD.3B2FA890]
>
> This is curious to me, since @corp.nac.net is a small exchange
> implementation with only about 50 users behind it, and there is no questi=
on
> that there is no spamming going on from here.
>
> So, it=E2=80=99s not a question of adding a filter or not using gmail; it=
is not
> me who is using gmail in this problem.
>
>
>
> From: Josh Luthman [mailto:josh@imaginenetworksllc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 9:32 AM
> To: Alex Rubenstein
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: gmail spam help
>
>
> Create a filter.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Feb 12, 2015 8:11 AM, "Alex Rubenstein" <alex@corp.nac.net<mailto:
> alex@corp.nac.net>> wrote:
> Is there anyone on-list that can help me with a world -> gmail email
> issue, where email is being considering spam by gmail erroneously?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
