Opened 6 years ago

Last modified 6 years ago

#7011 assigned Question/How do I...?

Too many civicrm emails "on hold"

Reported by: Liz Mestres Owned by: Liz Mestres
Priority: Medium Component: Tech
Keywords: civicrm spam Cc:
Sensitive: no

Description (last modified by Liz Mestres)

Hi, For some reason there are an extraordinary number of emails "On Hold" including many that I know are good and shouldn't bounce. Are there "bounce" controls somewhere that we could adjust? and is there a way to mass update the current "on holds" to remove the hold? Thanks, Liz

Hi, Here's a bit more info. I just sent an email to someone I had just removed the "On Hold" and got this message:

This is the mail system at host

I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.

For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message.

The mail system

<mdekadt@…>: host[] said: 554 5.7.1 [P4] Message

blocked due to spam content in the message. (in reply to end of DATA command)

Reporting-MTA: dns; X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 9F78BD4024 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; liz@… Arrival-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 10:18:08 -0400 (EDT)

Final-Recipient: rfc822; mdekadt@… Original-Recipient: rfc822;mdekadt@… Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 5.7.1 [P4] Message blocked due to spam content in

the message.

Return-Path: <liz@…> Received: from ( [])

by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F78BD4024 for <mdekadt@…>; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 10:18:08 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Liz Mestres" <liz@…> To: Maarten de Kadt <mdekadt@…> Cc: Subject: Reading for April 6 Housing Seminar attached Content-Disposition: inline Reply-To: "Liz Mestres" <liz@…> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 10:18:08 -0400

Change History (4)

comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by Liz Mestres

Description: modified (diff)

comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by Ross

Keywords: civicrm spam added
Owner: set to Joseph
Status: newassigned

Hi Liz,

Given that your site has been compromised, it may in fact be the case that spam content is getting into these emails. I noticed that the hack I fixed returned, so somewhere on your site there is a gapping security hole. If spam content is getting into the emails, it may be best not to send such mail until we discover how the site is being hacked.

I'm asking joseph to look into the civicrm specifics.


comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by Joseph

Hi Liz,

A general note about how bounces are processed in CiviCRM. There are two meta-categories of bounces, hard and soft. If an email address returns as a hard bounce, like the email address doesn't exist any longer, the address is put on hold. If an email address returns as a soft bounce, like mailbox is full, it isn't put on hold until the third soft bounce. Here's the list of defined bounce reasons and whether they're hard (1) or soft (3):

None of the most recent Brecht mailings I looked at indicate that there's spam content in them, and none of the most recent bounces indicate anything out of the ordinary. I've updated the criteria on the Mailing Bounce report to list the bounce reason for the ten most recent mailings. Only 62 bounces:

I've created a smart group of all the on hold email addresses (4K+), but I would assume most of these are valid:

For bulk updating this group, you can create a profile that can be used with the Batch Update via Profile option in the action dropdown list, but there's a limit of updating 100 records at a time.

Some of the known good email addresses could have been put on hold due to a time in the past when the mailbox was over quota. In those cases it would be safe to reenable them, but I would recommend investigating the bounce reason before on holding the email address. The bounce report linked above would be a good place to do that.

As far as the specific email headers listed above, was that sent with CiviCRM? If you provide more detail about it and the content of that email, I could try to give a bit more insight into why it was rejected by the receiving server.


comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by Joseph

Owner: changed from Joseph to Liz Mestres

Here's the copy of the original email:


For seminar on April 6 on Foreclosures, please read the attached, paying particular attention to the discussion of the Three Pillars, and see what you think of the concrete proposals at the very end.

See you April 6, 1:30

Peter and Tom

REMINDER: Due to illness, the Housing Seminar session on Mortgage Forclosures originally scheduled for this Saturday, March 23 has been POSTPONED to Saturday April 6. The fourth session on Rent Control originally scheduled for April 6 has been pushed back to April 20.

The Housing Question

Mortgage Foreclosures: Socially Just Solutions

Tom Angotti & Peter Marcuse with Special Guests NOTE: Due to illness, this session is POSTPONED to APRIL 6

How can residents in homes being foreclosed best be helped to stay in their homes? Should only those who can afford them be helped to stay? Should banks or lenders be made whole by government help if there are losses? Is the goal of public policy to restore a healthy housing market or to avoid speculation in housing? This series of workshops addresses current housing issues. It focuses on the real roots of housing problems and both immediate and radical solutions. Each session will involve a leading housing activist, readings, and in-depth discussions led by Peter Marcuse and Tom Angotti. Participants will prepare short papers summarizing and reflecting on the readings.The series can be taken as a 4-Session class or as stand-along seminars. Sessions include:

Feb. 23 - Housing & Displacement after Sandy March 9 - The Creeping Privatization of Public Housing April 6 - Mortgage Foreclosures: Socially Just Solutions April 20 - Rent Control: Economics & Social Justice Tom Angotti teaches in the Hunter College Department of Urban Affairs & Planning. From 1995 to 2001 he was Chair of the Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment at Pratt. He is the author of New York for Sale: Community Planning Confronts Global Real Estate, Metropolis 2000: Planning, Poverty and Politics, and Housing in Italy. He was previously a city planner with the NYC Department of City Planning, and worked for state governments in New Jersey and Massachusetts.Peter Marcuse, a planner and lawyer, is Professor Emeritus of Urban Planning at Columbia University. His fields of research include city planning, housing, the use of public space, the right to the city, social justice in the city, globalization, and urban history, with some focus New York City. He has taught in West and East Germany, Australia, the Union of South Africa, Canada, Austria, Spain, Canada, and Brazil. His books include, co-edited with Ronald van Kempen, Globalizing Cities: A New Spatial Order?, Of States and Cities: The Partitioning of Urban Space, and most recently, a co-edited volume, Searching for the Just City and a chapter in A Right to Housing. His blog,, contains several pieces on the Occupy Wall Street

Tuition: $10

Free for Brecht Forum Subscribers

» Register Now! [link]

I wonder if the mention of house foreclosures, the mention of money and the register link cumulatively set off a spam flag? It's tough to tell because the response from the mail server at Roadrunner isn't very verbose:

Final-Recipient: rfc822; mdekadt@… Original-Recipient: rfc822;mdekadt@… Action: failed Status: 5.7.1 Remote-MTA: dns; Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 554 5.7.1 [P4] Message blocked due to spam content in the message.

Liz, have you had any other messages similarly reject in the recent past?

Please login to add comments to this ticket.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.