Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

much stumbling blocks. Marc Am 16.09.2015 um 13:43 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 16.09.2015 um 13:38 schrieb Marc Richter: Am 16.09.2015 um 11:41 schrieb Axb: Although, the intended setup with exemptions by defining empty forwarders for DNSBL zones was not my idea - this scenario is described on

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

Hi Axb, Am 16.09.2015 um 11:41 schrieb Axb: Although, the intended setup with exemptions by defining empty forwarders for DNSBL zones was not my idea - this scenario is described on the SA wiki as a working solution: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CachingNameserver#Non-forwarding This seem

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

hrieb Axb: On 09/16/2015 11:36 AM, Marc Richter wrote: Although, the intended setup with exemptions by defining empty forwarders for DNSBL zones was not my idea - this scenario is described on the SA wiki as a working solution: http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CachingNameserver#Non-forwarding T

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

Hi Adam, that's a great workarround and perfectly fits my needs! Thank you for that! :) I'll use this if I cannot find out why my exemptions do not work in a reasonable amount of time. Best regards, Marc Am 15.09.2015 um 20:14 schrieb Adam Major: Hi. If you don't want change DNS resolver

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

Hi Bowie, thanks for your reply. I would suggest temporarily removing the forward completely as a test and see if this fixes the problem. If so, then your exemptions are not working correctly. If not, then double-check that you are actually using the local server and not still querying the IS

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

if you are trying to insult people at all costs really? you would recognize it when i intend to do so Please read your previous reply again. You will find that you used a very harsh tone against someone who comes here asking questions in a reasonable and moderate tone. Yes - maybe I *am* do

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

ontents, queries for that copy will be in your cache and be fast. Given that a modern SA parallelizes DNS queries a somewhat slow DNS response (hundreds of Msecs) won't have too much overall affect on the spam processing time. On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Marc Richter wrote: Yes Am 15.09.2015 um 13:30 s

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

Yes Am 15.09.2015 um 13:30 schrieb Axb: On 09/15/2015 01:23 PM, Marc Richter wrote: Also, you shouldn't make assumptions without measuring something: 1. without forwarding: ;; Query time: 543 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) 2. with forwarding to my ISP's servers: ;; Que

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

me: 543 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) 2. with forwarding to my ISP's servers: ;; Query time: 2 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) That's 271 times faster than root-servers's lookup. Marc Am 15.09.2015 um 12:55 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 15.09.2015 um 12:51 schrieb Mar

URIBL_BLOCKED while using local BIND

Hi everyone, I recently read the following in all my filtered Mail: 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. So I read what's written there and setup a local DNS server, as

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

rl/spamd -x -u spamd -g spamd" to "/usr/bin/vendor_perl/spamd -u spamd -g spamd" 3. systemctl daemon-reload 4. systemctl restart spamassassin Now it works again like a charm, running spamd as spamd:spamd, and using spamc. Thanks @ all for trying to help in this case! :) Best

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

tried to run spamd as root and this is what it results in: spamd: cannot run as nonexistent user or root with -u option Best regards, Marc Am 11.09.2015 um 12:05 schrieb Olivier Nicole: Marc Richter writes: Hi KAM, why not - spamassassin seems to respect the user_prefs file. Of course I&#

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

make things slower and not solve the issue. Regards, KAM On September 11, 2015 5:35:12 AM AST, Marc Richter wrote: Guess this means that I have to run "spamassassin" instead of spamc, don't I? I do not understand the reason for spamc to exist then

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Guess this means that I have to run "spamassassin" instead of spamc, don't I? I do not understand the reason for spamc to exist then - but based upon the conversation result, it seems like the way to go ... hope my host can handle the load. Am 10.09.2015 um 12:50 schrieb Ma

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi RW, When I issue "spamassassin --test-mode -D" as the user the filter.sh - runs as, I get this in the long output: dbg: config: read file /var/lib/spamassassin/.spamassassin/user_prefs So, it tries to read the user_prefs from the daemon's home, what is clear, because it cannot know what use

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi @ all, maybe I'm doing it wrong here - I do not insist on being unfailable. But what's the correct way to do it then? Best regards, Marc Am 10.09.2015 um 01:48 schrieb RW: On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 14:48:14 -0700 jdow wrote: On 2015-09-09 13:51, RW wrote: On Wed, 9 Sep 2015 17:27:54

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi RW, Do you mean that ww is a unix user? The normal way to do this is to run spamd as root and run spamc as the unix user. Passing -u to spamc is really intended for virtual users, I'm not sure whether it works for unix users. Are you sure it worked before? ww is a unix user, yes. And it wo

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi Matus, Am 09.09.2015 um 15:01 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: On 09.09.15 13:47, Marc Richter wrote: Regardless if it's necessary or not, I have done so. It also happens regularly by cron (all 3 hours), along with other jobs like sa-learn, sa-update and sa-compile. reload should be e

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

when the developers intend spamc to be used for this purpose? - How do I get spamc to respect user_prefs file? Best regards, Marc Am 09.09.2015 um 13:47 schrieb Marc Richter: Hi jdow, hi Matus, thanks for your replies. Regardless if it's necessary or not, I have done so. It also happens

Re: SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi jdow, hi Matus, thanks for your replies. Regardless if it's necessary or not, I have done so. It also happens regularly by cron (all 3 hours), along with other jobs like sa-learn, sa-update and sa-compile. > On 09.09.2015 11:12 Matus wrote: > > have you tried running spamassassin -D ? may

SA doesn't respect my user_prefs

Hi everyone, I'm running SA 3.4.1 with Perl 5.22.0 . It works quite well, but since a few weeks, it looks like my user_prefs isn't taken into account by SA anymore. Let's show this by example: There are *lots* of blacklist_from entries in there; one of them is: blacklist_from *@neuro

Re: Initial setup of SA - please help.

could send me spam and "from" is my domain, by my policy in the SPF record - "-all" - this mail is rejected. SPF helped very much to us. Lot of spammers use the same To: and From: ... J.K. Cituji Benny Pedersen : On søn 15 aug 2010 15:57:57 CEST, Marc Richter wrote Could anyb

Re: Initial setup of SA - please help.

ELIST - Test hits. It seems as if I just read the header wrong, sorry. I'll have a closer look to this, and I'll write again if I'm still experiencing something, I don't get. Thank you all so far! Am 15.08.2010 16:46, schrieb John Hardin: On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, Marc Richter wro

Initial setup of SA - please help.

Hello, I'm using SA since 5 years now. Yesterday I was switching my Debian system to a gentoo Server and had to reinstall SA this way. I thought I transfered the config nearly identical, but it seems to not be the case, since I get results in filtering, which I dont understand: http://pasteb