Jump to content

Terrible Toll

Members
  • Content Count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Terrible Toll last won the day on September 30

Terrible Toll had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Terrible Toll

  • Rank
    Consultant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    London, UK
  • Interests
    Geology, Astronomy, Photography
    Rowing, X-C Skiing, Walking & Climbing
    old Land Rovers

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.abdm.co.uk

FileMaker Experience

  • Skill Level
    Expert
  • FM Application
    15 Advanced

Platform Environment

  • OS Platform
    Mac
  • OS Version
    OSX Yosemite 10.10.5

FileMaker Partner

  • Membership
    FileMaker TechNet
    FileMaker Business Alliance

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for the email. Explains nicely the process I use for storing attachments used in 360works CloudMail. AWS get a little twitchy about using S3 public access - even though this is what we want. Any idea if you can link via a domain not hosted through AWS to the s3 bucket? AWS not happy about the inconsistent 'branding' and non-domino links in the email.
  2. Non-documented use of CMQueueMessage We have been adjusting our email structure and looking at how the received emails show in email clients and we noticed that the CloudMail system was simply adding the From address, so it appeared as: address@email.com <email @address.com> in the header. By changing the information being posted to the from address for CMQueueMessage, I have found that you can change the format to appear in the expected form - name <email @address.com>. e.g. fromaddress = "name <email @address.com>"
  3. Further to this topic, I now have an excellent attachment upload system working with CloudMail. Before sending a CloudMail campaign, the attachment file and also a thumbnail image is uploaded. The URL of the thumbnail is then embedded in the message text and the file URL linked to the image. However, occasionally, when email traffic is very high, the upload fails and the returned URL for the file or thumbnail is "?". Is there any way I can persuade FileMaker to wait a little longer for the the URL to be returned? - I suspect this may just be a timing issue. Many thanks - Anatole
  4. You can simply set it up to use just the one campaign. I use the campaigns as email templates - they can be updated any time anyone wants to send a new batch. The results section then has to be able to be filterable by batch, so that you can choose which mailing you want to see the results for, even though they all came from the same 'campaign'.
  5. It appears that the SPF failure is the result of an intermediary filtering service provided by Everycloud. The email path is being spotted by the Outlook server and their domain (antispameurope.com) is not being recognised or included in the original SPF details.
  6. Further to correcting the previous issue we are still getting a lot of mails being received in recipient junk folders. Particularly when handled by Outlook Exchange servers. On examining the headers of the recipient emails the SPF test was always failing on AWS emails because the "domain of amazonses.com does not designate 94.100.134.10 as permitted sender” ...(or any other shared IP address that SES has used - SES seems to just use 83.246.65.101 and 94.100.134.10). Whether emails pass or fail the spam testing seems entirely random and the only critical difference between them that I have spotted is their respective SCL ratings of -1 or 5 for non-spam or suspected spam. Today I ran some checks on several client systems also using the AWS system with the same SPF results and concluded that the SPF settings for amazonses.com may not be correct or are now out of date. The IP addresses that SES was using for our emails at this time was: 94.100.134.10 and 83.246.65.101, but they are not included in the SPF settings for amazonses.com . I have posted a query on the forum, but have had no response. I have even changed our subscription to 'Developer' to try to get some technical support, but nothing has been forthcoming yet. So in desperation I am posting here too. Any help would be much appreciated. Anatole Beams - - - - DNS record: amazonses.com (results shown from dmarcanalyzer.com ) v=spf1 ip4:199.255.192.0/22 ip4:199.127.232.0/22 ip4:54.240.0.0/18 ip4:69.169.224.0/20 ip4:76.223.180.0/23 -all IP 199.255.192.0/22 199.127.232.0/22 54.240.0.0/18 69.169.224.0/20 76.223.180.0/23 - - - - Email header shows: Authentication-Results: spf=fail (sender IP is 83.246.65.101) smtp.mailfrom=amazonses.com; butterflylondon.com; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=butterflylondon.com;butterflylondon.com; dmarc=bestguesspass action=none header.from=butterflylondon.com;compauth=pass reason=109 Received-SPF: Fail (protection.outlook.com: domain of amazonses.com does not designate 83.246.65.101 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=83.246.65.101; helo=hsmx05.antispameurope.com; Received: from hsmx05.antispameurope.com (83.246.65.101) by VE1EUR02FT055.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.13.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1750.20 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:07:07 +0000 Received: from a43-137.smtp-out.amazonses.com (54.240.43.137) by mx-gate86-hz2.hornetsecurity.com; Mon, 01 Apr 2019 18:07:07 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ylwamdh6eitpmqro6pafgsjzjiwoxo6k; d=butterflylondon.com; t=1554134810; h=From:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID:Date; bh=bHx40E+7UjshcrjXD91KQXpnO6dK/pOB8KvNgdIwlYM=; b=BN3hZtKuCwTitv80Ta2iwqIQxV6c+QiJiprx6s+huCEvpr8in23WAMh3+puKBTBW bKmYpxoKW2EgXAkkbhd0ZgIiOqurvE28nlLYtcf9jkh/YY7d0H9cr2XmA7nJcJ9MlkR Pvfww6/r3RUcqhCdhV/Co1F2hpQ4DZhZZ5zs+y+U= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw; d=amazonses.com; t=1554134810; h=From:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID:Date:Feedback-ID; bh=bHx40E+7UjshcrjXD91KQXpnO6dK/pOB8KvNgdIwlYM=; b=kHYeLbt2OKOenT2L5gnI4Cd5dtLCtEH1br1b2BvRwxaCg4v6JPz0EgmN3TLI9SvL ITHQzKeGNp3mHhdE/WxSTO9Vzr1/PUmxG8f27kQ1Z0gUB4zDnhMwpjF6dYDtwVca73Z hjWChFGnVCY2RRnRADXt5R6/l1KxexDDFWeBcCUE= From: test@butterflylondon.com To: anatole@butterflylondon.com Subject: POTENTIAL SPAM: SIMPLE TEST MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <01000169d9a73d7b-0b2d1193-f7e6-4475-bad8-21dd528f77d9-000000@email.amazonses.com> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 16:06:50 +0000 X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.04.01-54.240.43.137 Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.uMOQwmFugmdoVcy4W1AbM/Osc73Of2TtTIloxaj1zSg=:AmazonSES X-antispameurope-sender: 01000169d9a73d7b-0b2d1193-f7e6-4475-bad8-21dd528f77d9-000000@amazonses.com X-antispameurope-recipient: anatole@butterflylondon.com X-antispameurope-MSGID: 5f87ead918d374999f135010e830add5-03cf307c2b77c2826c97ea89d007e361 X-antispameurope-Virusscan: CLEAN X-antispameurope-disclaimer: This E-Mail was scanned by www.antispameurope.com E-Mailservice on mx-gate86-hz2 with 7E956D79B7B X-antispameurope-date: 1554134812 X-antispameurope: INCOMING: X-antispameurope-Connect: a43-137.smtp-out.amazonses.com[54.240.43.137],TLS=1;EMIG=0 X-antispameurope-detected-infomail: yes X-antispameurope-WC: 2:288:2:4688:0:142:0:0:0:0:0:2:2:0:1:0:1:103:121:103:0:0:0:0:1:40:0:0:0:2:0:0:0:0::0:1:0:0:0:0:0 X-antispameurope-SPFRESULT: PASS X-antispameurope-RBLWL: CLEAN X-antispameurope-Spamstatus: CLEAN X-antispameurope-REASON: XARG-WL:xw_exprx_190313-62-0141 --//-- X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: 5
  7. Rather an old posting - but this is possible and we do it all the time to record all emails sent by CloudMail. We also had to put in a script step to ignore server results when downloading AWS results, so the BCC'd results are not confused with the rest. To apply the BCC, simply add another recipient before sending the email: Set Variable [ $recipient; Value: CMAddRecipient( recipientemailaddress ) ] Set Variable [ $recipient; Value: CMAddRecipient( filemakerserveraddress ) ]
  8. Hi I just broke the click feature on CloudMail, so I thought I would drop a hint on this thread. Not only does your email have to be HTML for the CloudMail plugin to include view and click feedback, but you have to be careful to use " speech marks in your coding. I rewrote the scripting to merge data from FileMaker and used ' single quote marks to distinguish between the HTML coding and the FileMaker coding instead of using \" . Using ' worked just fine, but stopped the CloudMail plug-in from applying the code for the click feedback. The example below shows working code using \" - if you replace these with ' then the script works but the click code is not added by the plugin to the email. Example script that adds the attachment and a thumbnail onto the HTML email : Case ( PatternCount (EMAIL::_g_message_HTML; "<<attachment>>"); Substitute ( EMAIL::_g_message_HTML ; "<<attachment>>"; "<br><a href=\"" & $$attachmentURL & "\" download><img src=\"" & $$attachmentTHUMB & "\" alt=\"Click to view " & EMAIL::Attachment FILENAME & "\" width=\"240\" vspace=\"2\"></a>"); Substitute ( EMAIL::_g_message_HTML ; "</body>"; "<br><a href=\"" & $$attachmentURL & "\" download><img src=\"" & $$attachmentTHUMB & "\" alt=\"Click to view " & EMAIL::Attachment FILENAME & "\" width=\"240\" vspace=\"2\"></a></body>") ) If there is no <<attachment>> marker in the text then it places the linked image thumbnail at the end of the HTML body.
  9. All sorted - the SPAM scoring is now around 9/10, so pretty much as good as we could hope for. Many thanks for your response Ryan
  10. It appears that the issue was not one of poor SPAM scoring at all, but a result of not applying a custom DNS name. By leaving the DNS name as the IP address, the email system worked, but the filters could detect the AWS instance IP address within the email. Applying a custom DNS name to the DNS listing for the clients domain and using that instead cleared up the issue. Many thanks to the prompt response from 360works support.
  11. I have set up several client systems with the CloudMail plugin to facilitate small batch email facilities. Despite setting the system as per the AWS guidance with SPF and DKIM validation, the system works well but we have some problems with SPAM filtering by some recipient servers (Office 365) where they have filters set strictly. After running some tests, it appears that the AWS SES system is picking up some poor scoring on the [unsubscribe] facility. Example: <p class=3D'style5'><a href=3D'http://54.91.242.137/CloudMail/unsubscribe/13aef5d0-6cf1-48da-85ba-9ef0eb2f8a57'>Unsubscribe</a></p><img border=3D'0' src=3D'http://54.91.242.137/CloudMail/view/13aef5d0-6cf1-48da-85ba-9ef0eb2f8a57' width=3D'1' height=3D'1'> The SPAM scoring seems to highlight the IP addressed unsubscribe feature as poor and applies 3 points, with an additional 0.5 point for the img containing no alt attribute. So my query here is: can we use a proper URL to the unsubscribe link and can I make sure that the img border that it assigns has an alt attribute? CORRECTION: it may be that the img is the AWS tracking pixel that doesn't have the alt attribute. This alone would half our SPAM score and might solve our immediate problems in this regard. Any hints or tips would be much appreciated. Many thanks, Anatole Beams
  12. Thanks for your response Olger. You could be quite right. I am not able to reproduce the problem, so it could be just a filter. However, I suspect it is not just the one client, which make me think it is more than just that.
  13. I have set up a subdomain on our domain so the link on the attachment is now: http://aws.momentum.uk.com/CloudMail/click/49857fb6-3454-4b18-b3d8-a07a78a6f76f/0 However, this initial link off the email is insecure (http). It links in turn to secure location where the image is stored (https). Does anyone know if it is possible to make the intermediate link https as well? Why is it that the IP address that we have on AWS is only http?
  14. I think it may be because the initial link on the email to download the attachment is not secure. Example: http://54.91.242.137/CloudMail/click/49857fb6-3454-4b18-b3d8-a07a78a6f76f/0 Surely this should be a secure link? The IP address is the one supplied when CloudMail links to AWS, so I am not sure if we have any control over this. Other CloudMail links such as unsubscribe are also similar so will likely have the same problem if clients are blocked from using insecure sites.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.