Forum Discussion
Possibility to raise the spam threshold for mailbox (Exchange online / Security & Compliance Center)
- May 17, 2019Hi!
These two articles should help
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/securitycompliance/anti-spam-protection#extra-information-if-you-receive-too-much-spam-in-office-365
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/office365/SecurityCompliance/configure-your-spam-filter-policies
Hope that answers your question
Best, Chris
These two articles should help
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/securitycompliance/anti-spam-protection#extra-information-if-you-receive-too-much-spam-in-office-365
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/office365/SecurityCompliance/configure-your-spam-filter-policies
Hope that answers your question
Best, Chris
- PatrickF11May 17, 2019MCT
thank you very much for your reply.
Just to make it really clear to me:
Quote from Docs.ms:
On the Allow Lists page, you can specify entries, such as senders or domains, that will always be delivered to the inbox. Email from these entries is not processed by the spam filter.
This should do the trick to me.
When i add a sender, the mails from this sender are never going through the spam filters at all?
This could be okay, a better way would be to raise the threshold. Isn't it?
(Or is this just a rule for inbound mails?)
The usage of dkim wouldn't be proper solution, right?
The recepients are often end-user customers with private domains or freemailer, no corporate domains.
Thank you very much.
- May 17, 2019This is whitelisting the sender/domain. You can also do this by creating a transport rule in the Exchange Admin Console to bypass spam filtering.
Part of a good anti-spoofing policy is to implement SPF, DKIM and DMARC if possible.
Hope that clarifies!
Best, Chris- PatrickF11May 21, 2019MCT
just as a feedback:
The whitelisting doesn't have any effect.
By the way: Microsoft says:
Exchange Online customers who need to send legitimate bulk commercial email (for example, customer newsletters) should use third-party providers that specialize in these services.
So when im honest: Whe shouldn't find a solution to bypass this reglementations, even if i would like to do :D