On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 05:13:43PM +0100, natan wrote:
> IP ban may make sense - but there was a similar problem with another machine
> also with spamassin4.x - after returning to 3x there was no problem
Are you SURE there was NO problem? Or is it possible that the problem
*just isn't reported* in
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn skrev den 2025-02-13 18:22:
Dear SpamAssassin Support Team,
https://matrix.spfbl.net/212.83.50.80
non-compliance domain.
i never will pay $2 for resolving this, same reason i dont use it in
spamassassin anymore
sorry that i did miss that you had spf pass fr
Benny Pedersen skrev den 2025-02-14 00:05:
Bill Cole skrev den 2025-02-13 21:29:
On 2025-02-13 at 11:13:43 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:13:43 +0100)
natan
Feb 13 17:02:06 amavis5 amavis[9316]: (09316-01) _WARN: check:
dns_block_rule RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED hit, creating
/var/amavis/v
Bill Cole skrev den 2025-02-13 21:29:
On 2025-02-13 at 11:13:43 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:13:43 +0100)
natan
is rumored to have said:
Hi
Sorry but University debate
The machines were 1:1 clones
For testing, I also updated debian11 -> debian12 to rule out other
issues and the effect wa
Kevin A. McGrail skrev den 2025-02-13 19:42:
If I understand you right, Benny, you are pointing out the RPBL and
URIBL blocks?
yes, imho a pmc member should make a ticket to have apache.org resolve
it so its not saying blocked rules
If so, ASF Infrastructure team handles everything. Might b
It appears that John Hardin said:
>> PS: If this leads to questions like "what exactly was the point of the
>> thousand new TLDs?"
>> you're not the only one asking.
>
>ICANN monetizing their product. Period.
Actually, if you look at ICANN's finances, they're retrenching because
the new TLDs hav
On 2025-02-13 at 12:49:31 UTC-0500 (13 Feb 2025 12:49:31 -0500)
John Levine
is rumored to have said:
[...]
I'm guessing that wissen.online is the same company as
wissenonline.de.
It's pretty clear from the 2 websites that they are entirely different.
"Wissen" is German for "knowledge" so I
On 2025-02-13 at 13:25:44 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:25:44 +0100)
Benny Pedersen
is rumored to have said:
https://matrix.spfbl.net/90.186.69.50
move avay from this ip
What *evidence* do you have for the OP using that IP to connect to hosts
other than his own mailserver?
As far as I can
On 2025-02-13 at 06:28:15 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Feb 2025 11:28:15 +)
Marc
is rumored to have said:
I was wondering if it could be interesting for spamassassin to get
also into the business
No, never, not at all.
SA is NOT a business. we are not "in the business" of anything.
of scanning fo
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 18:22:44 +0100,
"wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn" wrote:
>
> How can we lower our spam score due to your negative rating of our top-level
> domain?
>
You may add your MX to https://www.dnswl.org/ and also add DMARC record like
"v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none"
It should have some
On 2025-02-13 at 11:13:43 UTC-0500 (Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:13:43 +0100)
natan
is rumored to have said:
Hi
Sorry but University debate
The machines were 1:1 clones
For testing, I also updated debian11 -> debian12 to rule out other
issues and the effect was the same
One machne who
cat /etc/
On 13/02/2025 20:16, Richard Doyle wrote:
On 2/13/25 10:25 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn skrev den 2025-02-13 19:02:
Hi Benny, Hi Levine,
tnx! Wissen.online it also the name of our company ... so we need .online
and not wissenonline.de (ist another company)
stop
On 2/13/25 10:25 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn skrev den 2025-02-13 19:02:
>> Hi Benny, Hi Levine,
>>
>> tnx! Wissen.online it also the name of our company ... so we need .online
>> and not wissenonline.de (ist another company)
>>
>>> stop using send emails from pbl li
ttps://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20250213-r1923772-n/T_SCC_TLD_ONLINE
That testing is based on the submissions of mass-scanning results by
some of our users. Looking back through recent days I can find exactly 0
cases of "ham" hitting that rule.
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com
If I understand you right, Benny, you are pointing out the RPBL and
URIBL blocks?
If so, ASF Infrastructure team handles everything. Might be that they
are using public resolver or our volume is high enough to trigger
blocks. We could open a ticket and give them some guidance.
LMK if I und
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamproc1-he-fi.apache.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.8
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.8 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31
tests=[DKIM_ADSP_DISCARD=1.8, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.997,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCK
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn wrote:
But, the fact and problem is this :
PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.999
and with website in our signatur on top: FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD_FP=1.999
We probably need to resolve the overlap, but you're not going to avoid
getting *some* reputational d
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn skrev den 2025-02-13 19:02:
Hi Benny, Hi Levine,
tnx! Wissen.online it also the name of our company ... so we need
.online
and not wissenonline.de (ist another company)
stop using send emails from pbl listed ips eq dynamic ips
Yes we change it next days doing
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, John Levine wrote:
It appears that wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn said:
Are there any specific configurations or adjustments we can make to lower
the high spam score of our emails?
Or can you put us on one of your global whitelists for trusted .online
domains?
I doubt
John Levine skrev den 2025-02-13 18:49:
I'm guessing that wissen.online is the same company as wissenonline.de.
That domain
should work fine.
de tld will fail on pbl listed ip aswell imho :=)
oh never mind
Hi Benny, Hi Levine,
tnx! Wissen.online it also the name of our company ... so we need .online
and not wissenonline.de (ist another company)
> stop using send emails from pbl listed ips eq dynamic ips
Yes we change it next days doing is listed
But, the fact and problem is this :
PDS_OTHER_BAD_
wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn skrev den 2025-02-13 18:22:
Are there any specific configurations or adjustments we can make to
lower the high spam score of our emails?
https://multirbl.valli.org/lookup/90.186.69.50.html
avoid using online tld
X-Spam-Status No, score=1.375 tagged_above=-999
It appears that wissen.online | Stefan Mehlhorn said:
>Are there any specific configurations or adjustments we can make to lower
>the high spam score of our emails?
>
>Or can you put us on one of your global whitelists for trusted .online
>domains?
I doubt there is such a thing. The .online TLD
Dear SpamAssassin Support Team,
We are a software company that provides an HR tool and we are experiencing
significant problems because our emails are constantly being flagged as spam
by SpamAssassin. This is a critical issue for our company as it affects our
communication with customers. We us
Matus UHLAR - fantomas skrev den 2025-02-13 17:26:
On 13.02.25 11:28, Marc wrote:
I was wondering if it could be interesting for spamassassin to get
also into the business of scanning for personal/sensitive data. Maybe
as a separate project?
I have the impression there is growing demand for
Hi
Example full log:
https://paste.debian.net/1349829/
/etc/nsswitch.conf
hosts: files dns
networks: files
protocols: db files
services: db files
ethers: db files
rpc: db files
netgroup: nis
W dniu 13.02.2025 o 16:52, Matija Nalis pisze:
On
On 13.02.25 11:28, Marc wrote:
I was wondering if it could be interesting for spamassassin to get also
into the business of scanning for personal/sensitive data. Maybe as a
separate project?
I have the impression there is growing demand for "personal identifiable
information" services. I ha
Hi
Sorry but University debate
The machines were 1:1 clones
For testing, I also updated debian11 -> debian12 to rule out other
issues and the effect was the same
One machne who
cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 127.0.0.1
IP ban may make sense - but there was a similar problem with another
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 04:11:52PM +0100, natan wrote:
> I have a couple of servers on all of them with spamassassin3x and I have no
> problem
> and on one where there is spamassassin4 I have problems as above
>
> To put it even simpler 90% of traffic is handled by servers with
> spamassassin3x
@Benny
Okay what don't you understand in this thread?
I have a couple of servers on all of them with spamassassin3x and I have
no problem
and on one where there is spamassassin4 I have problems as above
To put it even simpler 90% of traffic is handled by servers with
spamassassin3x where I hav
natan skrev den 2025-02-13 15:01:
Hi
Thenx for help but this url is not very clear
I have own resolver
ii pdns-recursor 4.1.11-1+deb10u2 amd64 PowerDNS Recursor
ii rbldnsd 1.0~20210120-2 amd64 small nameserver daemon
designed for DNSBLs
dig test.uribl.com.multi.uribl.
natan skrev den 2025-02-13 12:03:
Spamasaasin4.x gets less traffic than others.
and now please show the real problem, not workarounds
Hi
Thenx for help but this url is not very clear
I have own resolver
ii pdns-recursor 4.1.11-1+deb10u2 amd64 PowerDNS Recursor
ii rbldnsd 1.0~20210120-2 amd64 small nameserver daemon
designed for DNSBLs
dig test.uribl.com.multi.uribl.com txt +short @127.0.0.1
"permanen
natan writes:
> Feb 13 11:48:14 amavis5 amavis[934307]: (934307-01) SA info: async:
> aborting after 4.815 s, deadline shrunk: URIBL,
> A/kra20at.cc.multi.surbl.org, rules: URIBL_ABUSE_SURBL,
> URIBL_CR_SURBL, URIBL_MW_SURBL, URIBL_DM_SURBL, URIBL_PH_SURBL,
> SURBL_BLOCKED, URIBL_CT_SURBL
This c
I was wondering if it could be interesting for spamassassin to get also into
the business of scanning for personal/sensitive data. Maybe as a separate
project?
I have the impression there is growing demand for "personal identifiable
information" services. I have the impression that such scannin
Hi
Another Problem wher I found when I migrate to Spamassasin-4.x
spamassassin -V
SpamAssassin version 4.0.0
running on Perl version 5.36.0
many times in log I get:
Feb 13 11:48:14 amavis5 amavis[934307]: (934307-01) SA info: async:
aborting after 4.815 s, deadline shrunk: URIBL,
A/kra20at.
36 matches
Mail list logo
