test

[gary shindler]

I've used that email address for years. It's never happened before. Thanks for the clarification, Paul.


From: Paul Mather <paul at GROMIT.DLIB.VT.EDU>
To: BOC-L at LISTSERV.ISPNETINC.NET
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2011 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: test

On Aug 8, 2011, at 10:09 PM, gary shindler wrote:

> Testing. Don't know why the email I sent read as spam.

The message was narrowly classified as spam, mostly because it originated from a known spam source (Yahoo!) according to blacklists used by the mail server hosted by BOC-L.  The greatest contributing factor, though, was that your Yahoo! e-mail address username ends in numbers.  (The logic being, I suppose, that it is more likely to have been created automatically.)  Presumably, if you were just bewlay instead of bewlay68 then your message would have crept under the spam radar. :-)

This is why your message was considered spam:

Content analysis details:  (5.2 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name              description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is freemail (bewlay68[at]yahoo.com)
1.3 RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL        RBL: Relay in RNBL,
                          https://senderscore.org/blacklistlookup/
                          [98.139.212.127 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE    RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low
                          trust
                          [98.139.212.127 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED  No valid author signature, adsp_override is
                          CUSTOM_MED
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD      Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
                          domain
2.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in
                          digit (bewlay68[at]yahoo.com)
1.7 RAZOR2_CHECK          Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL


It may be that the Yahoo! relay has now been removed from the relevant spam blacklists, which is why your followup test message wasn't also categorised as spam.

Cheers,

Paul.