Page 1 of 1

Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:26 pm
by johnny1000
Since some time yesterday my gmx.com address seems to have stopped recieving email forwarded from SG.

I can see in my SG address list that SG is forwarding all test mails, but they don't show up in my gmx.com mailbox.
Trying other SG domains fails too.
Sending mail directly to my gmx.com address succeeds.
Changing my SG protected email address to my gmail.com address, and then sending through SG to the gmail address, also succeeds.

So right now it _seems_ that the problem is with gmx.com

Any other gmx.com users missing their email?

Best regards

Johnny :)

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:39 pm
by adginald
Yes, me too. Exactly the same symptoms, although this is a gmx.co.uk address

I had to move my protected address just to log into the bbs. Goodness knows how much mail has been lost today.

Adginald

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:59 pm
by greatwolf
Yes, I am noticing the same exact problem. I was wondering what the hell is going on.

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:51 am
by Marco2G
Just about anyone using a mailserver that uses barracudacentral's blacklist (and perhaps others) will have trouble.

Spamgourmet.com seems to have been blacklisted for SPAM. Which makes sense, after all I've received quite a number of SPAM messages prior to the outtage seemingly comming from spamgourmet.com

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:19 am
by adginald
I have requested removal of 216.75.62.102 from Barracuda's blacklist. I received this reply:
Thank you for contacting Barracuda Networks regarding your issue. Your issue is important to us. We have assigned a confirmation number: BBR21504775658-20429-24714 to this case.

We apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused you. We have removed 216.75.62.102 (Please wait 24-48 hours) from our blocklist for 30 days, at which time it will be re-evaluated.

So please post if you find it's resolved (after 24-48 hours)

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:37 pm
by johnny1000
Thank you, adginald, for your swift action.

Do I understand correctly, that the removal of 216.75.62.102 from Barracuda's blacklist should resolve this problem for all SG users using gmx.com?

Best regards

Johnny :)

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:13 pm
by adginald
I believe so. In fact, another user (different protected address) has reported he/she's back online now, so let's hope gmx follows with all its domains. Apparently many email providers use Barracuda's list.

I have also seen a change to another email address, which I tried to move to in the interim without success. It's working now, implying the block is gradually lifting. Of course, after 30 days we might have to do it all over again :(

But let us all know after 48 hours if you're working.

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:25 pm
by dibo
Hello,

I had the same problem. No more forwarded mails to my GMX.de and GMX.com (USA) accounts for a few days.

Obviously, the blacklist removal request is working now as I have just received mails to my spamgourmet inbox in my GMX accounts again. Thanks for the quick action!

I really hope that this service will last forever - best invention agains SPAM! :D

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:16 am
by greatwolf
Okay it seems to be working again now.

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:39 am
by johnny1000
Forwarding to gmx.com via SG works for me again :)

Thank you, adginald, for fixing this for us :)

Best regards
Johnny :)

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:12 pm
by josh
Thanks guys (adginald!) for taking care of this!

After 17 years, I confess I no longer have it in me to deal with 'friendly fire' from other spam fighting services. It takes a lot of energy to approach of one of these things when they've decided you're a spammer even though you've been on the same side they're on for (sometimes much) longer than they have.

Also experience has shown that it's usually easier for our users who are also users of the offending services to get something done than it is for us to do it, since the admins at the other services incorrectly assume the worst about us in the first instance.

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 7:25 pm
by adginald
Thanks Josh, it is to you we should be grateful. Spamgourmet is a great service, and most of us would be lost without it.

In fact, in the notes to my request to Barracuda I pointed out that they should be getting LESS spam from SG, as the worst should be already prefiltered by the service itself. But it was received and dealt with automatically, so I fear it fell on deaf ears. If it decides in 30 days the problem still exists, we'll have to go through the process again. Unfortunately, it took us all at least 24 hours to realise something was wrong, so we may lose emails again.

Keep up the good work!

Adginald

Re: Any other gmx.com users missing email?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:19 pm
by josh
Certainly they might get some messages through spamgourmet to unexpired addresses that are anybody's idea of spam. This is particularly true for the addresses that are pinned open indefinitely by the sg user.

But what Barracuda needs to do is to look at where the message actually came from - at the top of the headers, and do whatever it is they do with that information, instead of looking at the server(s) in the middle. A lot (I thought all) black listing services handle this situation properly - we had to deal with this issue like 15 years ago with a few of them, but it didn't take long for them to understand what was going on.

For instance, their own servers are involved in transmitting messages to the end users - would they black list them as well? You see the issue.