Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Muthu N.C
Thank you Kevin and all for the update. We are started receiving spam e-mails from "*.eu" domain in more numbers.May be the latest rules might catch those. Any rough estimation on when would the latest rules be available? Thanks, Chollamuthu N. On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wr

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Kevin A. McGrail
On 1/4/2016 4:37 PM, Muthu N.C wrote: It looks there are latest version of rules available greater than 1720996. But I am not getting that rules. I am seeing now lot of spam emails comes through. I see on the below link there are latest version of rules exist. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 04.01.2016 um 22:37 schrieb Muthu N.C: It looks there are latest version of rules available greater than 1720996. But I am not getting that rules. I am seeing now lot of spam emails comes through. I see on the below link there are latest version of rules exist. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.o

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Muthu N.C
It looks there are latest version of rules available greater than 1720996. But I am not getting that rules. I am seeing now lot of spam emails comes through. I see on the below link there are latest version of rules exist. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?longdatelist=1&perpage=99#r20160104_r1

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Kevin A. McGrail
On 1/4/2016 4:18 PM, Muthu N.C wrote: I am using the version 3.4.1 spamassassin. I am running sa-update to update the rules. The rules stopped updating after Dec 21st. Below is the output when running with debug mode..Any help on getting the latest update of the rulls will be helpful. Jan 4

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Jeremy McSpadden
current version is 1720996 new version is 1720996, skipping channel 1720996 == 1720996 -- Jeremy McSpadden | Flux Labs Local - 850-250-5590x501 | Mobile - 850-890-2543 Fax - 850-254-2955 | Toll Free - 877-699-FLUX Web - http://www.fluxlabs.net On Jan 4, 2016, at 3:19

Re: sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 04.01.2016 um 22:18 schrieb Muthu N.C: I am using the version 3.4.1 spamassassin. I am running sa-update to update the rules. The rules stopped updating after Dec 21st. Below is the output when running with debug mode..Any help on getting the latest update of the rulls will be helpful. whe

sa-update not updating the rules

2016-01-04 Thread Muthu N.C
I am using the version 3.4.1 spamassassin. I am running sa-update to update the rules. The rules stopped updating after Dec 21st. Below is the output when running with debug mode..Any help on getting the latest update of the rulls will be helpful. Jan 4 13:55:47.210 [8531] dbg: util: secure_tmpfi

Re: DNS lookups - bug with recursive lookups, or shoddy bind config?

2016-01-04 Thread Chris J
On 04/01/2016 20:48, Joe Quinn wrote: By the way, have you considered subscribing to the dev@ list and contributing to SA? You ran through this issue pretty much perfectly, other than the bad luck with our Bugzilla's results on Google. Time is my main issue (that and being a rather rusty with p

Re: DNS lookups - bug with recursive lookups, or shoddy bind config?

2016-01-04 Thread Joe Quinn
On 1/4/2016 3:39 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: --On Monday, January 04, 2016 8:28 PM + Chris J wrote: Before I raise this on Bugzilla, I just want to run this past people as I'm quite happy that I've failed to configure something, but can't see what. In short, RBL blacklists haven't bee

Re: DNS lookups - bug with recursive lookups, or shoddy bind config?

2016-01-04 Thread Chris J
On 04/01/2016 20:39, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: If you're using Net::DNS 1.01 or later, you must patch SA. There is an entire thread dedicated to this issue.

Re: DNS lookups - bug with recursive lookups, or shoddy bind config?

2016-01-04 Thread Quanah Gibson-Mount
--On Monday, January 04, 2016 8:28 PM + Chris J wrote: Before I raise this on Bugzilla, I just want to run this past people as I'm quite happy that I've failed to configure something, but can't see what. In short, RBL blacklists haven't been working and I've finally, with tcpdump, traced

DNS lookups - bug with recursive lookups, or shoddy bind config?

2016-01-04 Thread Chris J
Before I raise this on Bugzilla, I just want to run this past people as I'm quite happy that I've failed to configure something, but can't see what. In short, RBL blacklists haven't been working and I've finally, with tcpdump, traced it to SpamAssassin not requesting recursive queries. The se

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread Richard Doyle
On 01/04/2016 05:46 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 04.01.2016 um 13:53 schrieb a.sm...@ldexgroup.co.uk: >> On Jan 4, 2016, 3:42 AM, rwmaillists at googlemail wrote: >>> >>> No look-up is done. RDNS_NONE tests whether rdns is recorded in the >>> received header. You need either to turn it on or t

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread a . smith
On 2016-01-04 14:31, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > I'm guessing this might be the trick you need: > https://www.ssisg.com/galaxy/knowledgebase.php?action=displayarticle&id=24 Thanks Kevin, I'd taken a look at this already but I'd misunderstood the original reply, I thought I was looking for som

News at dnswl.org - Self Service Portal

2016-01-04 Thread Matthias Leisi
Hello SA list, I believe that this list reaches quite a few active users of dnswl.org: — Announcement — News from the dnswl.org team: For the past years we used an e-mail based approach for user requests to add, change or remove data. This was rather time-consuming a

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 04.01.2016 um 13:53 schrieb a.sm...@ldexgroup.co.uk: On Jan 4, 2016, 3:42 AM, rwmaillists at googlemail wrote: No look-up is done. RDNS_NONE tests whether rdns is recorded in the received header. You need either to turn it on or turn the rule off. Hi, Thanks for the reply. Ok so I assume

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread Kevin A. McGrail
On 1/4/2016 7:53 AM, a.sm...@ldexgroup.co.uk wrote: On Jan 4, 2016, 3:42 AM, rwmaillists at googlemail wrote: No look-up is done. RDNS_NONE tests whether rdns is recorded in the received header. You need either to turn it on or turn the rule off. Hi, Thanks for the reply. Ok so I assume you

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread a . smith
On Jan 4, 2016, 3:42 AM, rwmaillists at googlemail wrote: > No look-up is done. RDNS_NONE tests whether rdns is recorded in the > received header. You need either to turn it on or turn the rule off. Hi, Thanks for the reply. Ok so I assume you mean its a header that has to haven been put in

Re: RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread RW
On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:40:23 +0100 a.sm...@ldexgroup.co.uk wrote: > > > Hi, > > I'm using Spamassassin 3.4.1 on FreeBSD 9.3, called via a pipe from > Exim. Today I created a meta rule to give additional points to > FREEMAIL where also there is no RDNS. What I've noticed is that many > email

RDNS_NONE always being triggered

2016-01-04 Thread a . smith
Hi, I'm using Spamassassin 3.4.1 on FreeBSD 9.3, called via a pipe from Exim. Today I created a meta rule to give additional points to FREEMAIL where also there is no RDNS. What I've noticed is that many emails are triggering RDNS_NONE when I don't think they should. DNS lookups are working