Re: [SAtalk] whitelist exploit

2003-05-27 Thread listuser
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Matt Kettler wrote: > 3) dialup RBLs should skip the oldest one or two, but I think it already > does this part just fine. Actually we were just talking about this tonight in another thread, "Defining my own rules." It's never really be said for sure but we're under the i

Re: [SAtalk] whitelist exploit

2003-05-27 Thread Matt Kettler
Hmm, then it looks like whitelist_from_rcvd should be using the value of num_check_received. Unless for some reason you over-rode that to a large number... Although, I'd argue that to be truly proper SA needs to use different limits on "num_check_received" for different circumstances. I've mad

Re: [SAtalk] whitelist exploit

2003-05-27 Thread Jim and Karin Hunziker
I want to confirm the Amazon problem. I'm getting spam from someone with forged Amazon headers, and it's getting a -100.0 tacked on. I don't have a whitelist entry for Amazon.com in my user preferences, and the site installation is stock 2.55. Below is the header. -- Jim Hunziker From [EMAIL