On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>
> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> hostname localhost
> dig -x 222.252.239.56
>
> ...
> ;; QUESTION SE
Howdie;
I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
hostname localhost
dig -x 222.252.239.56
...
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;56.239.252.222.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
;; ANSWE
Mark Mahabir wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a large number of domains I've blacklisted in my local.cf file e.g.
>
> blacklist_from *...@domain.com
>
> however spam from some domains gets tagged, whereas others don't. What
> can I do to improve the situation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark
>
>
>
Does the From: hea
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009, LuKreme wrote:
> Actually, you have that backwards. As a USER I use beta or alpha
> software all the time. I have no problem with that, it's only my data I
> am risking. As an admin, however, it's rather irresponsible. And as a
> CUSTOMER if I saw my mail being marked up b
Hi,
I have a large number of domains I've blacklisted in my local.cf file e.g.
blacklist_from *...@domain.com
however spam from some domains gets tagged, whereas others don't. What
can I do to improve the situation?
Thanks
Mark
>
> Sorry for the OT post, but the simscan list appears to be
> completely dead and I need to figure this out. I've used
> simscan in the past with no problems; I just can't figure out
> what's happening to spam scoring higher than 6.0 but less
> than 12.0, so anybody who's familiar with t
Sorry for the OT post, but the simscan list appears to be completely dead
and I need to figure this out. I've used simscan in the past with no
problems; I just can't figure out what's happening to spam scoring higher
than 6.0 but less than 12.0, so anybody who's familiar with the latest
sims
On Wednesday 02 September 2009, Mark Martinec wrote:
>Gene,
>
>> But, I had installed all the perl stuff that a spamassassin -D --lint run
>> had complained about, and I just noted in the email sa-update sent me
>> that 3 more bits of perl were on the missing list, and the final piece I
>> can't fi
Gene,
> But, I had installed all the perl stuff that a spamassassin -D --lint run
> had complained about, and I just noted in the email sa-update sent me that
> 3 more bits of perl were on the missing list, and the final piece I can't
> find in a fedora repo:
>
> 32760] dbg: diag: module not insta
