On 6/5/24 13:14, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there
are new rules, shouldn't it?
On 03.06.24 08:52, Bill Cole
On 6/5/24 11:14, postgarage Graz IT wrote:
On 6/5/24 09:17, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there are
new rules
On 6/5/24 09:17, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there are
new rules, shouldn't it?
On 03.06.24 08:52, Bill Cole
t; it by coincidence…
Anyway, thank you all.
On 6/3/24 14:52, Bill Cole wrote:
On 2024-06-03 at 08:35:32 UTC-0400 (Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:35:32 +0200)
postgarage Graz IT
is rumored to have said:
I think that the active.list file should be updated, when there are
new rules, shouldn't it?
On 6/3/24 12:02, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 03.06.24 07:26, postgarage Graz IT wrote:
>> A few days ago a lot of false negatives landed in our inboxes. As it
>> turned out the reason was that the for nearly all mails the
>> RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED and RCVD_I
Hello!
Debian 12.5
SpamAssassin version 4.0.0
running on Perl version 5.36.0
Server setup with iRedMail
A few days ago a lot of false negatives landed in our inboxes. As it
turned out the reason was that the for nearly all mails the
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED and RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE rule
