> >> LuKreme wrote:
> >> > On Jul 23, 2009, at 22:45, snowweb wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Is the email with attachment over 250KB?
> >
> > On 24.07.09 01:13, snowweb wrote:
> >> No, it's just 74Kb
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > the email or the attachment? In config you posted e-mails over 100K
>
>
>
>
> Jari Fredriksson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The headers of the strange spam are:
>>>
>>> Return-path:
>>> Envelope-to: u...@host.co.uk
>>> Delivery-date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:12:38 +0800
>>> Received: from [190.144.0.42] (helo=CWXNQKBTZ)
>>>by s1.host.info with esmtp (Exim 4.67)
>>>(
to adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
> 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
>
>
Well done... Solved by Matus! Thanks buddy.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Certain-spam-not-parsed-by-spamd%21-tp24638560p24642832.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> Jari Fredriksson wrote:
> > It apparently was never seen by SpamAssassin, if there were no X-Spam-*
> > -headers.
> >
> > How you call SpamAssassin? Any whitelisting there, do you call
> > SpamAssassin for your own mail? It seems the sender address is same as
> > receiver address. Whitelisted so
> LuKreme wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 2009, at 22:45, snowweb wrote:
> >
> > Is the email with attachment over 250KB?
On 24.07.09 01:13, snowweb wrote:
> No, it's just 74Kb
the email or the attachment? In config you posted e-mails over 100K
aren't checked. 74K attachment results in >100K mail.
--
M
rect that the From: header is the same as the recipient
(obviously spoofed), but the envelope is from an external sender and also
the first Received: line acknowledges that it was received from an external
server and email address. Which line does it check the SPF record of, just
the spoofable From: or one of the others?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Certain-spam-not-parsed-by-spamd%21-tp24638560p24640671.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
retry_use_local_part
transport = spamcheck
no_verify
I guess if their was whitelisting, that would have to be in the exim.conf
too, but i can't see any explicit whitelisting there.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Certain-spam-not-parsed-by-spamd%21-tp24638560p24640480.ht
LuKreme wrote:
>
> On Jul 23, 2009, at 22:45, snowweb wrote:
>
> Is the email with attachment over 250KB?
>
No, it's just 74Kb
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Certain-spam-not-parsed-by-spamd%21-tp24638560p24640402.html
Sent from the SpamAssa
On Jul 23, 2009, at 22:45, snowweb wrote:
there is one email which seems capable of avoiding
getting parsed by spamd.
Is the email with attachment over 250KB?
> I've recently implemented relaycountry and seen 90%+
> improvement in our ability to trap spam but there is one
> email which seems capable of avoiding getting parsed by
> spamd.
>
> All other messages get the x-spam headers added
> successfully but this one for some reason completely
> slips t
0.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
The above email contained a .zip file.
This was not random, as I've received three similar emails this morning and
none of them have x-spam headers all other emails are fine.
pete
--
View this message in context:
http://www.n
11 matches
Mail list logo
