SMTP server blacklisted?

[tukatshak]

As of about 7 p.m. EDT this evening (08/18/18), I am not able to send any emails, as I am getting the message that the HughesNet SMTP server IP address is blacklisted.  Is this one of those things where I have to wait 24 hours?  I know that spam traffic has been terrible of late.

Any suggestions?  Thanks!

Sukie in the Hudson Valley

[MarkJFine]

@tukatshak

Turns out smtp.hughes.net [69.168.97.48] is listed on spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net (as is smtp.lithium.com [208.74.204.5], btw).

Not to be pedantic, but that shouldn't technically prevent you from sending email. Some email servers my reject receiving it, preventing the intended recipient from getting it.

How exactly are you getting notified of this? Bounce email from the receiving server, perhaps?

Edit:
@Liz

@Amanda
Note to admins. I did notice this in the headers. Probably want to have the tech folks fix the SPF in your DNS entry:

      Received-SPF: neutral (smtp01.hughes.cmh.synacor.com: 97.73.80.47 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of hughes.net)

Setting the SPF helps to validate email from a specific domain and might alleviate getting listed on some blacklists due to forged/stolen senders coming from other email servers.

Edit2:
To do this, add a TXT record to the DNS entry that says something like:

v=spf1 a mx ip4:97.73.80.47 -all

The IP was taken from above, but it might have to be duplicated for the various servers used by Synacor (e.g., if there's a smtp02, smtp03, etc.).

[MarkJFine]

Did manage to check the SPF record using a third party tester that I use for my own domain(s).

Seems the record is there (and includes quite a range of allowable IPs) but is terminated by a '?'. That's what's causing the neutral response. If the '?' is changed to a '-all' it will cause the forged emails to fail.

You can also add a TXT record to implement DMARC reporting of successful/failed emails based on SPF and DKIM (if that's also implemented - doesn't look like it though).

[Brooke]

Hello tukatshak, apologies on the delayed response. Is this issue still ongoing for anyone?

-Brooke

[MarkJFine]

---

@Brooke wrote:

Hello tukatshak, apologies on the delayed response. Is this issue still ongoing for anyone?

---

smtp01.hughes.cmh.synacor.com is currently listed on:

cbl.abuseat.org

pbl.spamhaus.org

xbl.spamhaus.org

zen.spamhaus.org

https://bgp.he.net/ip/97.73.80.47#_rbl

smtp.hughes.net is currently listed on:

dnsbl-1.uceprotect.net

spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net

https://bgp.he.net/ip/69.168.97.48#_rbl

smtp.lithium.com is currently listed on:
spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net

https://bgp.he.net/ip/208.74.204.5#_rbl

#ugh

[tukatshak]

Dear Brooke,

Wow.  9 days to get a response?

My issue lasted at least 24 hours.  During this time, both native WebMail, and my popped Outlook account were completely hosed.  Then things righted themselves.  I have no way of knowing what happened in the background.

MarkJFine, bless his heart, has been trying to report all the places where HughesNet is blocked or reported on spam lists.  I hope someone at HughesNet will now look into this. 

Thank you for inquiring.  Now, if HughesNet would just stop all the spammers from using our addresses to produce spam....so we don't get on the bad lists....

[MarkJFine]

---

@tukatshak wrote:

Now, if HughesNet would just stop all the spammers from using our addresses to produce spam....so we don't get on the bad lists....

---

Pretty sure changing that softfail '?' to hardfail '-all' in the DNS SPF record might help to do that as long as all three smtp IPs I mentioned as well as 'a' and 'mx' are included.

Might be advantageous to employ DKIM if possible, but that may not be practical.

[maratsade]

"9 days to get a response?"

It takes as long as it takes -- there may not be a fast fix for this. And if they applied a fast fix and it didn't work, you'd be here ranting about how the fix didn't work.  Try to be patient. 

[GabeU]

---

@tukatshak wrote:

Dear Brooke,

Wow.  9 days to get a response? 

---

This is the General Discussion section.  It's not meant for support, which is clearly stated in the section description.  

If you have a future technical issue with which you would like help from a HughesNet representative I suggest posting in the Tech Support section to get that help.

[tukatshak]

I am sorry I made a mistake.  The heading to “Tech Support” says “Tips and Tricks”, and I did not need a tip or trick.  I needed immediate help.  I thought someone in the community might be able to help.  Again, I thank MarkJFine, who is far more technical that I could ever be for trying to point out that settings having nothing to do with my personal account might be changed to help a lot of people.

My apologies, again. Perhaps someone could have pointed me in the right direction a little earlier....

[GabeU]

@tukatshak

No problem.  I think HughesNet assumes, possibly mistakenly, that people will automatically know what Tech Support means and they then added the part about tips and tricks to say that the section includes those things, as well.  Perhaps the description is something that they should look at clarifying.  I've been on here so long that I don't even tend to read the section descriptions anymore, and I didn't realize that Tech Support said that.  

Customers like Mark, maratsade, myself, and many others, will often help, even when someone asks technical questions in this section.   And no doubt about it, Mark knows his stuff, and far more than I do, as well.   This is especially true of the type of issue being discussed in this thread. 

If the issue were still occurring it's very possible that Brooke would move this thread to Tech Support.  

[MarkJFine]

---

@GabeU wrote:

@tukatshak

Mark knows his stuff, and far more than I do, as well. 

---

Well, I wouldn't go that far. I know a little bit about a few things. 🤣

[Brooke]

Hi tukatshak, I hope everything has been well since I've last heard from you. I'm going to close this thread due to inactivity, but don't hesitate to reach out again, we'll be here to help! 

Thank you.

-Brooke

[Brooke]

Tukatshak, I do apologize my response was not quick to you, once I saw your post I began addressing the issue to our engineers the following Monday and I believe the issue has been resolved.

Thank you for the update!

-Brooke