How are people getting around Yahoo's DMARC policy which broke my mailing lists?
Question asked by Jim Dresser - 12/3/2014 at 5:52 AM
Everyone,   I'm running SmaraterMail 11 (yea, I probably should upgrade), and I have a bunch of email lists.  These lists were set up so that the 'From' address would show the sender's email address.  This allowed everyone who received the email list to know who sent it.
But, Yahoo (and other companies also), have changed their DMARC policy to reject any any email that says it's from a Yahoo customer, when it didn't really come from a Yahoo server.     More info     More info
So, I changed the mailing lists to say that the list email is from the list address (rather than the person).  And while this solved the basic issue, people are now complaining that they don't know who the email is from because the people don't sign their email.
How are people solving this issue?   I've seen that some people are modifying their non-SmarterMail email program so that the list email will show that it's from the list address (which solves the DMARC issue), but they are modifying the body of the email so that it says "The following comments were sent by ABC@yahoo.com".   The people receiving the email then know who sent the email.  Is this possible with SmarterMail?
Any other ideas?

1 Reply

Reply to Thread
PennineNick Replied
I also had this problem.  Like you I had to change the mailing list "List From Address" setting - from Poster Address to List Address.
That works for nearly all destination ISPs - apart from AOL.  AOL rejects the list emails when the originating sender is an AOL address - saying:
RSP: 550 5.7.0 () Unfortunately, messages from (mail server IP address) on behalf of (aol.com) could not be delivered due to domain owner policy restrictions.
That sort of makes sense - AOL think that emails from an AOL email address should only come from an AOL server.  So how do we configure a mailing list that we host so that it can handle subscribers that have an AOL email address?
Any help greatfully recieved.

Reply to Thread