locked
550 5.7.1 Message rejected due to content restrictions RRS feed

  • Question

  • We're using forefront protection for exchange 2010 and every once in a while the Cloudmark anti-spam signatures will block important clients from sending us email. Reporting the emails to Forefront-Legit@submit.cloudmark.com doesn't always get the issue resolved, but when we contact cloudmark directly they tell us to talk to Forefront. However, cloudmark isn't sure exactly how we're supposed to engage forefront on this type of matter.

    What phone number or email address can we use to handle these requests without an additional charge?

    Monday, April 19, 2010 3:14 PM

Answers

All replies

  • Hi,

     

    I would like to suggest that you contact Microsoft Product Support Services via telephone so that a dedicated Support Professional can assist with this request.

     

    To obtain the phone numbers for specific technology request please take a look at the web site listed below.

     

    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;PHONENUMBERS

     

    If you are outside the US please see http://support.microsoft.com for regional support phone numbers.

     

    Thank you for your patience and understanding.

     

    Regards,


    Nick Gu - MSFT
    Monday, April 26, 2010 9:51 AM
    Moderator
  • I too am getting this response from a supplier in UT - I am in UK see message copied below:

    You suggest contact support - who's cost will this be I am a purchaser and the site I wish to contact is the supplier (I am also using my personal e-mail address for this activity)

    Reason for multi addresses are because I have had a result from them on other occassions not all I have gone bust - seemingly....

    I wonder if they are using Outlook 2010?????????????  -  I use 2007 on win 7 no problems till using this site...

    From: System Administrator
    Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 11:48 AM
    To: Colin Mason
    Cc: 'contact@clickncopysystem.com'; 'support@clickncopysystem.com'
    Subject: Undeliverable: URGENT ATTENTION IS REQUIRED!

     

     

    Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.

     

          Subject:    URGENT ATTENTION IS REQUIRED!

          Sent: 04-May-10 11:48 AM

     

    The following recipient(s) cannot be reached:

     

          'Jessica Blair' on 04-May-10 11:48 AM

                550 5.7.1 Message content rejected <c2c672707936339ea5c92f03ada6f2dd>

     

          'contact@clickncopysystem.com' on 04-May-10 11:48 AM

                550 5.7.1 Message content rejected <c2c672707936339ea5c92f03ada6f2dd>

     

          'support@clickncopysystem.com' on 04-May-10 11:48 AM

                550 5.7.1 Message content rejected <c2c672707936339ea5c92f03ada6f2dd>

     

    Regards

    Tuesday, May 4, 2010 11:21 AM
  • I have been working with a Microsoft Support Engineer for over a week now on this exact same issue... Can someone post the resolution to this to help us out, would be greatly appreciated as its proving to be a very stubborn issue.
    Friday, November 19, 2010 7:35 PM
  • On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:35:44 +0000, Hockeytown wrote:
     
    >I have been working with a Microsoft Support Engineer for over a week now on this exact same issue... Can someone post the resolution to this to help us out, would be greatly appreciated as its proving to be a very stubborn issue.
     
    That description looks like it's not related to Forefront (but the
    agent log should tell you which agent was responsible). Try enabling
    pipeline and content tracing. If you have a reproducible situation you
    can limit the scope of the trace to just one recipient and keep the
    volume of traces and messages to a minimum.
    ---
    Rich Matheisen
    MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
     

    --- Rich Matheisen MCSE+I, Exchange MVP
    Friday, November 19, 2010 8:02 PM
  • We battled this exact same thing.. I ended up calling MSFT to engage the ForeFront Engineers and was basically on the phone with them everyday for for well over a week before a solution was found.. and here is what worked for us:

    1. Obtain the original bounced email

    2. Convert to .EML format (http://www.outlookfreeware.com/ has a tool to convert .MSG format to .EML)

    3. Submit to Cloudmark

     

    Cloudmark has always responded to me very fast but they will always want the original bounced email as it contains important header information required for examining and also they will always as for it to be in .EML


    Friday, January 21, 2011 4:27 PM
  • We had the similar issue with few of our clients. could not find a reason why these msgs are blocked as spam. Most of the time they had a signature with the logos/URLs in it. Only solution that we could think of it was add their mail server to allowed list in our egdge servers.  

    The following recipients returned permanent errors: email@domain.com. Reason: SMTP Server <smtpserver.domain.com> refused to accept your message (DATA), with the following error message: [550 5.7.1 Message rejected due to content restrictions]

     The attachment contains the original mail headers. Please verify recipient(s) mail addresses and try resending this message or contact your IT department with contents of this 

    roshan


    -roshan
    Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:46 PM
  • This was the solution for me. Cloudmark was RAPID to respond and agree to remove the flag on my company's toll free number.
    Friday, September 30, 2011 7:47 PM
  • We have been having this issue recently too - lots of our email is being rejected due to content restrictions, even if the email itself is completely blank.

    After some investigation by a helpful customer this has been traced to a hyphen being part of our domain name - does anyone else have experience of this? Apparently Microsoft are aware of this but have given no details of when it will be fixed.

    In the meantime our organisation is having difficulties doing business as we cant be sure our customers are receiving our mail. 

    If anyone can provide a workaround or can help further please can you let me know?

    Wednesday, January 18, 2012 3:22 PM
  • Fainster, good point.  I could not put my finger on it.  Same problem here most recent message from xxx@et-xxx.com was also rejected due to content restrictions.  This has been puzzling me for months now, and I did not pick the hyphen up.  I've just gone back over the past failures and there it is a hyphen.  There is one rejection however that has a "." in the initial and surname. 
    Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:09 AM
  • Thanks for posting the hyphen issue, our company is having the same issue of email being rejected due to the hyphen. 

    MS where is the fix?


    On further thoughts this is now happening to other clients without the hyphen.
    • Edited by GScully02 Friday, June 1, 2012 5:41 PM
    Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:28 PM
  •  we also having same problem with one of our customer. I don't think it is anything to do with hyphen because in our case there is no hyphen.

     In our case only FEP organizations are rejecting the emails probably because cloudmark does not cleanup itself accordingly to status of organization on MXToolbox and other block lists.

    So we've posted the problem to cloudmark in the hope. Let's see.

    Bad part is, Microsoft Remote Connectivity Analyzer SMTP outbound test passes successfully (This is ridiculous).

    And good part is cloudmark did not bounce our message.


    Shahid Roofi


    • Proposed as answer by Pantera68 Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:16 PM
    • Unproposed as answer by Pantera68 Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:16 PM
    • Edited by Nick Gu - MSFTModerator Wednesday, December 12, 2012 1:38 AM remove the address
    Tuesday, June 5, 2012 12:18 PM
  • I also have this problem with one of our costumer.

    A workaround is to put there’s IP address to there’s SMTP Server in my IP Allow List and then it worked as a charm.

    Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:18 PM
  • Today I came across this problem. I have a server running Exchange Server 2010 with FEX 2010.
    Apparently some fields were entering the SPAM, but I discovered that the problem is in the signature of the sender. The signatures have URLs and Cloudmark identifying this as SPAM because of it. Someone found a solution?
    Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:46 PM
  • Hi,

    you should submit samples to Microsoft so that they can fix it.

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb914008.aspx

    In urgend cases you should open a case with Microsoft.

    Greetings

    Christian


    Christian Groebner MVP Forefront

    Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:56 PM
  • Dear Cris, was an update of Cloudmark.
    we need a workaround for this, because are many reject emails and it is impossible to report on all cases. The business of my company are being harmed.

    Please, a gold hint!

    tks

    Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:02 PM
  • Hi,

    the only quick solution is to disable the content filter of FPE as long as Microsoft is inspecting your samples or to open a case.

    Greetings

    Christian


    Christian Groebner MVP Forefront


    Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:47 PM
  • Hi I have the same Problem

    You need to disable on the Edge Server the Attaxchement Filter Agent

    We search about 3 Weeks with MS!!

    Now it works

    Disable-TransportAgent -Identity "Attachment Filtering Agent"


    Roendi

    Thursday, February 28, 2013 2:13 PM
  • Hi I have the same Problem

    You need to disable on the Edge Server the Attaxchement Filter Agent

    We search about 3 Weeks with MS!!

    Now it works

    Disable-TransportAgent -Identity "Attachment Filtering Agent"


    Roendi

    I disagree with this solution.  The problem is NOT experienced by any other email service platform, including Google who seem to be able to accurately identify spam in any case.  The issue should not require reducing security or control over spam in any way.  Even adding the domain to whitelist is not sufficient.
    Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:51 PM
  • I was able to work around this problem by using the Exchange console and making a transport rule on the edge that reset the SCL to 0 for messages from certain external senders.  Since the edge agent processes before the FPE content filter agent, it mitigated the false positives from spiking up to SCL 9, though only for addresses I was concerned about.  Not the most elegant, but that was enough to get the job done.

    Wednesday, November 6, 2013 10:14 PM
  • Hi all,

    I have been trying to figure this out as well, i have tried almost everything , why i say almost, im sure i have left something out. 

    my client has been able to send messages to people a hundred times before with out a problem but then suddenly they have been blocked for "content" i dont know why as nothing has changed, i changed smtp's, added auth on with no change, i added spf records specifying my clients host and email server to it with out any luck. i added reverse dns and still nothing, i then tried taking out signature when then helped, i then changed the signature to plain text and then then worked........for a bit...... now we are still getting blocked  then tried to eliminate my firewall and now i can get mails from my client to me quickly but not to all, i am lost now in the world of cyber space with no where to go..... please if some one has some sort of fix that would be great :) :) :)

    Monday, April 7, 2014 1:36 PM
  • Hi,

    the best thing you can do is to submit samples or to contact Microsoft.

    Creating exclusions is only a temporary workarround.

    Greetings

    Christian


    Christian Groebner MVP Forefront

    Tuesday, April 8, 2014 7:22 AM
  • We faced the same issue and it was related to the FF.

    After disabling the Content Filter all messages went fine.

    It's not a complete solution while it's a workaround until we find how to exclude specific words for FF content filtering

    Sunday, September 21, 2014 10:19 AM
  • We had the same problem as above and it was related to ForeFront.

    Open Forefront>Policy Management>Antispam>Configure>Content Filter>Configure Content Allow Lists>Allowed Sender Domains> added the email address that was being rejected. That worked for us and may or may not work for you.

    Wednesday, January 6, 2016 7:29 PM