On Monday 15 March 2010, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
>On 15/03/2010 11:07 PM, j wrote:
>>> I've been having the same problem from several locations/ISPs, since
>>> mid-Saturday.
>>> "500 Can't connect to yerp.org:80 (connect: timeout)"
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>> Anyone figure this out? I have received the sa
On 15/03/2010 11:07 PM, j wrote:
>> I've been having the same problem from several locations/ISPs, since
>> mid-Saturday.
>> "500 Can't connect to yerp.org:80 (connect: timeout)"
>>
>> Dave
>
> Anyone figure this out? I have received the same yerp.org down errors and
> it's
> screwing up my SA r
> I've been having the same problem from several locations/ISPs, since
> mid-Saturday.
> "500 Can't connect to yerp.org:80 (connect: timeout)"
>
> Dave
Anyone figure this out? I have received the same yerp.org down errors and it's
screwing up my SA royally. I guess this is "what we get" when we
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> You must create an account here to use this:
> http://www.dnswl.org/registerreporter.pl
>
> It is still experimental. I expect it to work flawlessly. If it doesn't,
> please email me details off-list.
>
>
> It causes the "spamassassin --report" (or -r) command to a
On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 11:15 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> H. I guess this goes back to my inquiry about the Brazilian spam
>
> I'm still looking for a way (hopefully) to simply identify the *language*
> of the mail (when not determined from CHARSET_FARAWAY rules), so that our
> users m
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Ron wrote:
i think the only way to not scan outgoing mails in qmail is to add the
users IP address to /etc/tcp.smtp, unfortunately my users are on dynamic
IP that i cannot add it one by one.
Are you authenticating your users in any way? There are ways to whitelist
users
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Ron wrote:
whitelist_from *...@imagetransforms.com
Do not do this.
The From: address is trivially easy to spoof. You should not trust it to
this degree.
whitelist_from should only be used in unusual situations, when you know
exactly why one of the other whitelist opti
Hi Sir,
Please see inline. Thank You
On 3/16/2010 12:05 AM, RW wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:43:03 +0800
Ron wrote:
Hi All,
Newbie here, i have a qmail server, and i installed
qmail-scanner+clav+spamassassin. I'm trying to allow all my users
using whitelist_from but filter spoofed e-mail a
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:43:03 +0800
Ron wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Newbie here, i have a qmail server, and i installed
> qmail-scanner+clav+spamassassin. I'm trying to allow all my users
> using whitelist_from but filter spoofed e-mail address using
> whitelist_from_rcvd.
Whitelist rules whitelist, t
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
take a look at http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets
and search to "German Language Ruleset".
H. I guess this goes back to my inquiry about the Brazilian spam
I'm still looking for a way (hopefully) to simply identify the *lang
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:06:22 +0100
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On man 15 mar 2010 14:42:22 CET, Christian Gregoire wrote
> > Here is the picture : a PC whose local IP address is 10.10.3.4
> > (with no rDNS) submits a message to its SMTP gateway (john.fr),
> > which in turn delivers it to my platefor
On man 15 mar 2010 14:42:22 CET, Christian Gregoire wrote
Using SA 3.3.0. Any reason why RDNS_NONE now scores 1.3, when it was
down to 0.1 with the previous releases ?
The score was pretty much informational only previously and arbitrarily
set. The current score is what the mass-checks and
Hi All,
Newbie here, i have a qmail server, and i installed
qmail-scanner+clav+spamassassin. I'm trying to allow all my users using
whitelist_from but filter spoofed e-mail address using whitelist_from_rcvd.
Not sure If i'm following the manual correctly, but here's what on local.cf
internal
>> Using SA 3.3.0. Any reason why RDNS_NONE now scores 1.3, when it was
>> down to 0.1 with the previous releases ?
>The score was pretty much informational only previously and arbitrarily
>set. The current score is what the mass-checks and GA result in.
>> The below headers trigger the rule onl
LuKreme,
> Running spamd (SA-3.3.0) under FreeBSD 6.2 I see frequent timeout errors
> and message. When these occur, the mailserver seems to stop responding for
> seconds:
>
> 04:18:19 mail spamd[67527]: (__alarm__ignore__(141359))
> 04:18:58 mail spamd[67527]: check: exceeded time limit, skippi
LuKreme wrote on Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:04:22 -0600:
> Anything I can do to further trouble shoot this or eliminate these timeout
> errors?
Process the same message with spamc again. Does it take that long again?
Kai
--
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Am 15.03.2010 03:14, schrieb Marcus:
> Am Sonntag, den 14.03.2010, 23:31 +0100 schrieb Kai Schaetzl:
>> Marcus wrote on Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:16:31 +0100:
>>
>>> The messages differ in subject and body.
>>
>> Do they? Hm, I must have overlooked this in your first message. Oh, wait,
>> after reading
17 matches
Mail list logo