On 10/22/2014 2:40 PM, Jesse Stroik wrote:
I noticed URLs from the TLD .link aren't properly classified on my
mail server. I wrote a simple URI rule to recognize that TLD which
never matched. I wrote a similar body rule, which did properly match.
Interestingly, I do see DNS queries going out f
On 10/15/2014 6:50 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I'd have to dig into it to find out more but there are different
modules used for different tests so deviation in behavior is not
something that alarms me. If you replace your RegistrarBoundaries.pm
and it still has issues, please let us know. I a
On 10/15/2014 6:12 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I'm certain KAM is right and here's why.
...snip...
IOW, uri rules depend on matching the terminal part of the domain name
with an entry in SA's built-in TLD list and my version, installed from
the Fedora repo, doesn't yet include .link.
I reverted
On 10/15/2014 4:52 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
The TLDs are hardcoded in SA 3.3.2. We are working on not having
them hard-coded in 3.4.1.
I found Bug 6782, which I think you are referring to. I don't quite
understand the details of it. But are saying that the 'uri' and uridnsbl
rules
rely on
On 10/15/2014 4:52 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 10/15/2014 4:49 PM, Ken Bass wrote:
1) My local.cf has a rule to address the new .link domain which
spammers appear to be using recently:
uri LR_LINK_TLD /^(?:https?:\/\/|mailto:)[^\/]+\.link(?:\/|$)/i
describe LR_LINK_TLD Contains a URL in
I'm using Centos 7, which means SA version 3.3.2.
I am encountering several emails that are not being processed correctly
when checking against URI rules.
1) My local.cf has a rule to address the new .link domain which spammers
appear to be using recently:
uri LR_LINK_TLD /^(?:https?:\/\/|m
