+1 for two days now
On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 09:28 -0800, emmett wrote:
> I have been seeing this in my log once a day for a few days now. What is the
> problem and how can I get it resolved.
>
> This is the latest log entry, but all were failures with amazonaws:
>
> http: GET
> http://rules.ye
I have been seeing this in my log once a day for a few days now. What is the
problem and how can I get it resolved.
This is the latest log entry, but all were failures with amazonaws:
http: GET
http://rules.yerp.org.s3.amazonaws.com/rules/stage/3302013021221.tar.gz
request failed: 403 Forbidden:
On 14/02/13 14:48, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Ned Slider wrote:
Hi list,
Is it just me or is TBIRD_SPOOF hitting pretty much all initial email
sent by Thunderbird, not via a ML etc?
That was an experimental rule that hasn't panned out and has been
removed. It should go away with
On 14/02/13 14:34, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 14.02.2013 15:24, schrieb Walter Hurry:
Is anyone else being plagued by unreadable nonsense from hinet.net? It
originates from China, it seems. I've just had to tell procmail to send
it all to the bit bucket.
Just curious. Is hinet.net a known prob
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Ned Slider wrote:
Hi list,
Is it just me or is TBIRD_SPOOF hitting pretty much all initial email sent by
Thunderbird, not via a ML etc?
That was an experimental rule that hasn't panned out and has been removed.
It should go away with the next update.
--
John Hardin K
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:21:33 +
Ned Slider wrote:
> Nice idea, but why not just use SPF for fedex.com as they bother to
> publish an SPF record? Surely that has to be a far more reliable
> indicator it wasn't sent from fedex?
That works if the envelope sender is someth...@fedex.com, but if
Am 14.02.2013 15:24, schrieb Walter Hurry:
> Is anyone else being plagued by unreadable nonsense from hinet.net? It
> originates from China, it seems. I've just had to tell procmail to send
> it all to the bit bucket.
>
> Just curious. Is hinet.net a known problem?
yes, hinet is a problem sinc
On 2/13/2013 11:03 PM, Anirudha Patil wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Mark Martinec
mailto:mark.martinec...@ijs.si>> wrote:
Anirudha,
> I have a stable running setup of postfix after-queue using
amavis-new
> [currently using for content inspection and antivirus only] an
The mail came from 65.54.190.123 and it passes SPF
> dont use whitelist_from, with that setting anyone can use that email as
> sender to get whitelisted, this is okay if you do spf testing in mta
> only, so spamassassin follow it as an ok, but not if you are not testing
> spf in mta
What should I
Is anyone else being plagued by unreadable nonsense from hinet.net? It
originates from China, it seems. I've just had to tell procmail to send
it all to the bit bucket.
Just curious. Is hinet.net a known problem?
On 2/14/13 6:21 AM, "Ned Slider" wrote:
> On 12/02/13 20:33, Daniel McDonald wrote:
>>
>> On 2/12/13 1:15 PM, "David F. Skoll" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> PS: Beware of penalizing other countries too much. My mail originates
>>> from Canada and the PostgreSQL mailing list is (or used to be?) hosted
>>
On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 13:18 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Martin Gregorie skrev den 2013-02-11 16:41:
>
> > Maybe there's a case for classifying mail as ham/spam by reading the
> > raw
> > mail instead of looking at it with an MUA and being shown the HTML
> > part?
>
> why is it needed ?, if m
On 14/02/13 12:04, Ned Slider wrote:
Hi list,
Is it just me or is TBIRD_SPOOF hitting pretty much all initial email
sent by Thunderbird, not via a ML etc?
$ grep TBIRD_SPOOF *.cf
72_active.cf:##{ TBIRD_SPOOF
72_active.cf:meta TBIRD_SPOOF __MUA_TBIRD && !__HAS_IN_REPLY_TO &&
!__HAS_X_REF && !__T
Steve Freegard skrev den 2013-02-12 21:19:
header RELAY_NOT_US X-Relay-Countries =~ /\b(?!US)[A-Z]{2}\b/
and what date is the database from ?, ip2cc ipv4-addr, to show it when
its build, to update it either use the new relay_country plugin or
update ip2cc database, if its over 6 moun
On 12/02/13 20:33, Daniel McDonald wrote:
On 2/12/13 1:15 PM, "David F. Skoll" wrote:
PS: Beware of penalizing other countries too much. My mail originates
from Canada and the PostgreSQL mailing list is (or used to be?) hosted
in Panama. Furthermore, by far the lion's share of spam origina
Martin Gregorie skrev den 2013-02-11 16:41:
Maybe there's a case for classifying mail as ham/spam by reading the
raw
mail instead of looking at it with an MUA and being shown the HTML
part?
why is it needed ?, if mua clients dont trust html, then use text mode
mua, problem is gone
well it
Hi list,
Is it just me or is TBIRD_SPOOF hitting pretty much all initial email
sent by Thunderbird, not via a ML etc?
$ grep TBIRD_SPOOF *.cf
72_active.cf:##{ TBIRD_SPOOF
72_active.cf:meta TBIRD_SPOOF __MUA_TBIRD &&
!__HAS_IN_REPLY_TO && !__HAS_X_REF && !__THREADED && !_
Philippe Ratté skrev den 2013-02-13 23:05:
dbg: spf: def_spf_whitelist_from: already checked spf and didn't get
pass, skipping whitelist check
why does it not get pass when spf is okay ?
http://dmarcian.com/spf-survey/hotmail.com
| 3485 | %domain.ca | whitelist_from | u...@hotmail.com |
18 matches
Mail list logo
