Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On 09/06/2016 16:57, Sidney Markowitz [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > As to why you should have to list all the internal ip addresses again > in the > list of trusted ones ... Because the people who designed this had to > keep all > this in their head at one time and they did by thinking "This is the

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 06:50:55 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > (Note: For clarity, the > https://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.4.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html > link you provided IS the page I refer to when I say "reading the > wiki".) > > Ok, reading it again: it says > / > //"trusted_netwo

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

jimimaseye wrote on 10/06/16 1:50 AM: > CONCLUSION: it was working as the book says (even though the book is not > clear WHY the book says what it says). It's been a very long while since I worked with this code and I have to kind of twist my mind up funny to keep it in my head all at once, but t

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

(Note: For clarity, the https://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.4.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html link you provided IS the page I refer to when I say "reading the wiki".) Ok, reading it again: it says / //"trusted_networks IPaddress[/masklen] ... (default: none)// // //What networks or hos

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 02:54:34 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > FEEDBACK for all who have contributed: > > I have a result. > > It seems that the 'internal_networks' is only adhered to *in the > absence* of a 'trusted_networks' entry. If I remove the > 'trusted_networks', and simply leave: > > i

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

FEEDBACK for all who have contributed: I have a result. It seems that the 'internal_networks' is only adhered to *in the absence* of a 'trusted_networks' entry. If I remove the 'trusted_networks', and simply leave: internal_networks 195.26.90. then it is correctly applied: X-Spam-Report:

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

Yes it is but it all still works just as the linux version does. So is irrelevant actually (the only difference being its easier to install and setup on windows. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other-tp1211

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 12:49:03 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > On 08/06/2016 21:26, David B Funk [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > > Try running SA with the '--debug' option to see the explicit list of > > config files that it is reading. Make sure that it's reading yours > > and look at the ones that com

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On 08/06/2016 21:26, David B Funk [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > This sounds like a config file confusion issue. IE the SA that you are > running > is looking at different config files than the ones that you are editing > or some config file that is being read -after- your expected config files > is

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, jimimaseye wrote: On 08/06/2016 16:05, Matus UHLAR - fantomas [via SpamAssassin] wrote: note that if a server acts as your MX, it should be listed in internal_networks, no matter if other company manages it. That applies for backup MX servers for your dom

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On 08/06/2016 16:05, Matus UHLAR - fantomas [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > note that if a server acts as your MX, it should be listed in > internal_networks, no matter if other company manages it. > > That applies for backup MX servers for your domain, or, even primary > MX if > you fetch mail from

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers (doing their own teats no doubt). Plus they dont have just the one address - an incoming emial can land at an

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:59:26 +0100 Kevin Golding wrote: > On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye > wrote: > > > Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider > > who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers > > (doing their own teats no doubt). P

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

> > Did you restart spamd? > > > > Effectively yes (but no not really). I am using commandline scanner > whilst doing the tests so the LOCAL.CF is being loaded each time I run > the test. When it is all working then I will restart my spamd daemon to > take effect for all incoming mail. P

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

I did also test the TRUSTED_NETWORKS option as well (note: I tried "trusted" and "internal" network options before resorting to this maillist for advice). It results in: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on mailserver X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On 08/06/2016 14:51, RW-15 [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > > * internal_networks 195.26.90.* > > Try to avoid using any mark-up (assuming that's what the "*"s are), it > can be very confusing. > Noted. And well observed. (The asterix was markup (bold) not wildcard entered by me.) > > X-Mailer: Ap

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers (doing their own teats no doubt). Plus they dont have just the one address - an incoming emial can land at a

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 05:07:14 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > * internal_networks 195.26.90.* Try to avoid using any mark-up (assuming that's what the "*"s are), it can be very confusing. > X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) > X-hMailServer-Spam: YES > X-hMailServer-Reason-1: Rejected by Spamhaus. -

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

Hi Kevin I have entered the internal_network address as internal_networks 195.26.90/24 and even internal_networks 195.26.90.72 and it never made a difference. Very strange. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:07:14 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: I did try adding the "internal_networks 195.26.90. " option to my LOCAL.CF before, and in fact I have just tried it again based on your advice, but it doesnt make any difference. Here are the headers with * internal_networks 195.26.

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

Kevin Golding-2 wrote > Given the PBL listing is only the last external IP the fact that SA is > testing headers in your internal network explains why it's not testing an > IP one hop further out. Essentially it seems as if your internal_networks > is incorrectly set. Or, as your pasted confi

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 07:22:19 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: 1, You can see that Spamassassin considered and evaluated the IP address 195.26.90.72 (as reported in its report). Now this is the SECOND received header in the list. And yet it doesnt evaluate the most recent (first on list) [195.26

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 12:43 -0600, Philip Prindeville wrote: > On Aug 29, 2014, at 6:45 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: > > > I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common > > > thread is cloudapp You guys realize cloudapp.net is M

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On Aug 29, 2014, at 6:45 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: >> I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread >> is cloudapp >> >> /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: >> qmail-scanner[120

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On 08/29/2014 02:45 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: qmail-scanner[12013]: Clear:RC:0(216.170.

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: qmail-scanner[12013]: Clear:RC:0(216.170.115.184):SA:0(0.9/4.0): 4.409458 6225 comp..

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 19:06:21 -0700 "Linda A. Walsh" wrote: > My old email service was bought out by Megapath who is letting alot > of services > slide. > [snip] > > Any ideas on how to get a cheapo-doesn't want to support anything ISP > to start > blocking all the garbage the pass on? > > >

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/16/2014 12:08 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote: The start of filtering out spam is filtering out mail that doesn't have a valid return address -- it's not valid email. I'm stuck because my ISP won't filter it out, I have to download it to find out that it's invalid, then local sendmail rejects it,

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 07:37 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > Be liberal in what you accept, strict in what you send. In particular, > > later stages simply must not be less liberal than early stages. > > Your MX has accepted the message. > > My ISP's MX has accepted it,

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/17/2014 7:37 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: Karsten Br�� wrote: Similarly, your scripts do not reject messages, but choose not to fetch them. === No... fetchmail fetches them, "sendmail" rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and spam

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/15/2014 9:08 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote: I was wondering if anyone had any experience in showing their ISP "the light"... Oh well Linda, is your email domain tlinx.org? I'm assuming that it is because there is an under construction web page on that domain and I cannot imagine a co

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Sunday 17 August 2014 at 16:37:36 (EU time), Linda Walsh wrote: > No... fetchmail fetches them, "sendmail" rejects them because they > don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and spamassassin scripts > get called after the email makes it through sendmail. My scripts don't > see the em

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Karsten Br�� wrote: Similarly, your scripts do not reject messages, but choose not to fetch them. === No... fetchmail fetches them, "sendmail" rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and spamassassin scripts get called after the em

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 19:06 -0700, Linda A. Walsh wrote: > My old email service was bought out by Megapath who is letting alot of > services slide. > > My main issue is that my incoming email scripts follow the SMTP RFC's and if > the sender address isn't valid, then it's not a valid email that s

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Alex wrote: Hi, > The only response my ISP will give is to turn on their spam filtering. I tried that. > In about a 2 hour time frame, over 400 messages were blocked as spam. Of those less > than 10 were actually spam, the rest were from various lists. > > So having them censoring my incomi

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Hi, > The only response my ISP will give is to turn on their spam filtering. I tried that. > In about a 2 hour time frame, over 400 messages were blocked as spam. Of those less > than 10 were actually spam, the rest were from various lists. > > So having them censoring my incoming mail isn't gon

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 01:47 PM, hospice admin wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:43:37 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 01:33 PM, hospice admin wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:43:37 +0200 > From: axb.li...@gmail.com > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 > > On 06/07/2014 01:33 PM, hospice admin wrote: > > > > > > > >> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 01:33 PM, hospice admin wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 > From: axb.li...@gmail.com > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 > > On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: > > I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had >

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had a chance to look at the memory implications in more detail. We run a VM infrastructure here, so I'll load it up on one server and keep throwing resources at it until I have something

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:49:32 +0200 > From: axb.li...@gmail.com > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 > > On 06/07/2014 12:19 PM, hospice admin wrote: > > Just wondering if anyone had any advice along the lines "you really &g

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 12:19 PM, hospice admin wrote: Just wondering if anyone had any advice along the lines "you really must do this", or "you'd be crazy to do that" re- all the new stuff, etc? I'm particularly 'interested' in things relating to Bayes, which has bitten me in the rear so many times, b

Re: Advice

On 07/03/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:25 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being bloc

Re: Advice

On 7/3/12 2:34 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I've had this set up for a while. I find the emails they send to be almost useless. I don't know if there is any benefit to simply being signed up. The point isn't to remove the person complaining as much

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I've had this set up for a while. I find the emails they send to be almost useless. I don't know if there is any benefit to simply being signed up. You get emails that basically say, "someone thinks your email is junk, but we're not going to tell you w

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:25 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: >> Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few >> customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount >> of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our SMTP servers. I have checked that none of our servers a

Re: Advice

AOL does operate their own, volume mail, blocking and require some sort of registration in order to send buld mail to AOL users. You may want to contact AOL for details. Sorry I don't have that contact information readily available. On Tuesday, July 03, 2012 11:19:05 Robert Fitzpatrick wr

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

David B Funk wrote: > Jo you didn't read Chris's statement closely. A conscientious mail server > administrator will configure the SERVER to -ONLY- accept encrypted > connections for SMTP-AUTH transactions; the server should enforce > the encryption requirements. > This is a religious war decla

Re: [sa-list] Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, David B Funk wrote: On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: Your server then enforces encryption and SMTP-AUTH, and the SSL will (hopefully) defeat any man-in-the-middle attacks by trans-proxies. That's exactly the problem I

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: > On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: > > Your server then enforces encryption and SMTP-AUTH, and the SSL will > > (hopefully) defeat any man-in-the-middle attacks by trans-proxies. > > That's exactly the problem I am reporting. A lot of mail clien

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > If they really run a "normal" MTA, and if that is authorized by their > ISP, then they should ask to be unlisted. (They should also get a > meaningful reverse DNS so that they can be "identified"). > Otherwise, they should relay via their ISP... Indeed, one o

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Leon Kolchinsky wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) >> smptd_client_restrictions >> >> Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org >> >> We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is >> getting to high for our o

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

R.Smits wrote: > Jeff Chan wrote: > >> Quoting Richard Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >>> Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am >>> running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the >>> sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus >>> Is this wise, or should I

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, R.Smits wrote: | We use : sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org now. It does not include the PBL (policy | Block List) | | We serve a big university and we cannot afford False Positives. | I can imagine that someone one the PBL (home user) runs a small | mailserver and cannot connect to our s

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

> Hello, > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > smptd_client_restrictions > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is > getting to high for our organisation. Wich list is saf

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting "R.Smits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jeff Chan wrote: > > Quoting Richard Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am > >> running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the > >> sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus > >> Is this

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Jeff Chan wrote: > Quoting Richard Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am >> running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the >> sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus >> Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl and switch to zen

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting Skip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I am not certain how anyone can claim that they have no FPs running through > those services unless they have prior knowledge of every inbound email. > That is impossible. My company deals with on the order of thousands of > companies and multiple times that in

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting Richard Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am > running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the > sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus > Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl and switch to zen.spamhaus? Please do

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Chris Edwards wrote: > On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: > > | Both Crackberry and Verizon force you to use their mail servers. Some other > | data providers are now doing transparent proxy on outbound e-mail. In > short, > | the user can't always control that. > > True, to an extent. I don't

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: Of course the best solution is for clients to always submit on port 465/587, and hope that's allowed out by the hotels / mobile connectivity providers. Fairly often not. I've been lucky with T-Mobile, but Sprint and Verizon apparently block

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: | Right, but transparent proxy of SMTP connections is available in even the | lowest end firewalls now (like free ones you get with service). OK. | And very few clients will complain if they aren't required to do SMTP | auth, which means that the user will n

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Oct 9, 2007, at 3:52 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: However, even assuming your user *is* using the *berry server or the verizon transparent proxy, then mails they send will in the main emerge from a legit mail server run by grown-ups, which is far far less likely to be blacklisted then a user

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: | Both Crackberry and Verizon force you to use their mail servers. Some other | data providers are now doing transparent proxy on outbound e-mail. In short, | the user can't always control that. True, to an extent. I don't know about the *berry, but imagine/

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Oct 9, 2007, at 11:31 AM, Chris Edwards wrote: Your travellers should be using one of: - Authenticated SMTP submission bypassing your DNSBL tests - VPN into your network - Your webmail service Thus it shouldn't matter if their hotel is blacklisted (many are). Both Crackberry and Verizon for

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Oct 9, 2007, at 10:37 AM, James E. Pratt wrote: Well, in the real world, many of us who would have to scan over 150,000 inbound emails a day, of which about 85% are pure 100% spam simply don't have that luxury... Are you using a 486 to process inbound mail? My 1.4Ghz Athlon 2 system w

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Skip wrote: | Unless I somehow had something configured improperly, the blacklists | were rejecting connection to the MTA before SMTP auth. Hi, That's the problem - you don't want to do blacklist lookups for SMTP-AUTH submissions. FWIW we use Exim which has plenty flexibil

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Skip, Chris's point is that your users **should** use SMTP authorization to distinguish their trusted connections from other connections that must be spam filtered. Additionally, you should NOT do ANY spam filtering on these SMTP Auth connections... especially not outright RBL blocking. You

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

> From: Chris Edwards > Your travellers should be using one of: > - Authenticated SMTP submission bypassing your DNSBL tests > - VPN into your network > - Your webmail service All of these are available. Unless I somehow had something configured improperly, the blacklists were rejecting connectio

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

>> -Original Message- >> From: Skip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 2:26 PM >> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >> Subject: RE: Advice on MTA blacklist >> >> > Well, in the real world, many of us who would have t

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Skip wrote: | I have a number of travelling personnel from my company. I don't want the | call at 11pm on a Wednesday night or 6 am on a Sunday morning from a hotel | and the network they are on is on one of those lists and they can't use | their email. Hi, Your travellers s

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

> Well, in the real world, many of us who would have to scan > over 150,000 inbound emails a day, of which about 85% are > pure 100% spam simply don't have that luxury... > > We've had best results with zen.spamhaus.org , other dnsbls > seem unreliable/not worth the effort > > regards, >

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Richard Smits wrote: | Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am | running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the | sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus | Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl and switch to zen.spamhaus? You should

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

> > Hello, > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > smptd_client_restrictions > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is >

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On 10/9/07, R.Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > smptd_client_restrictions > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is > getting

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Also, psbl.surriel.com has gotten much better in recent months. It used to have occasional FPs, but I haven't seen any in a while. In my own spam filtering, I merely score on RBLs and I don't outright block... but if I were a large ISP which didn't have that luxury, I'd probably use the followi

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

* R.Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello, > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > smptd_client_restrictions None, we put them like all restrictions into smtpd_recipient_restrictions. > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org reject_rbl_client zen.spam

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Jeff Chan writes: > Quoting John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > R.Smits wrote: > > Spamcop: no. Don't use them as an MTA RBL. I'm leery of even using > > them as a SA RBL, but it's a very bad idea to use them as an MTA RBL > > (too many false positives). > > I was about to give the same answer..

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

>> -Original Message- >> From: Skip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 1:17 PM >> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >> Subject: RE: Advice on MTA blacklist >> >> None. I'd rather bump up my system resources than al

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

John Rudd wrote: Spamcop: no. Don't use them as an MTA RBL. I'm leery of even using them as a SA RBL, but it's a very bad idea to use them as an MTA RBL (too many false positives). Actually, sometime in the past several months, SpamCop's FP rate dropped dramatically. I'm not privy to the insi

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > R.Smits wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > > smptd_client_restrictions > > > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the lo

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 at 10:00 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabulated: Spamhaus: yes. Use zen.spamhaus.org (you might end up needing to pay for it, and use a local cache, if you're a heavy traffic site, but, frankly, it's worth paying for). We use Spamhaus here with their datefeed service. Our

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On 10/9/07, John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > R.Smits wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > > smptd_client_restrictions > > > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam.

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

None. I'd rather bump up my system resources than allow a system completely out of my control to assess whether or not mail should run through my MTA and SA. - Skip

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

R.Smits wrote: Hello, Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) smptd_client_restrictions Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is getting to high for our organisation. Wich list is safe

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 17:34 +0200, R.Smits wrote: > Hello, > > Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) > smptd_client_restrictions > > Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org > > We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is > gett

RE: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Stuart Johnston wrote: > James Bucanek wrote: >> >> When I installed SA, I also installed Pyzor (there was some > reason I couldn't get Razor or DCC to compile, but I can't > remember what that is now). >> >> I was all set to configure it, when I just became totally > c

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

James Bucanek wrote: When I installed SA, I also installed Pyzor (there was some reason I couldn't get Razor or DCC to compile, but I can't remember what that is now). I was all set to configure it, when I just became totally confused. The only documentation I could find was the man pages, i

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

From: "James Bucanek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> jdow wrote on Friday, June 10, 2005: >1) You need to visit http://www.rulesemporium.com/ and select at least > a few of the SARE rules sets. They do really help SA performance. I'm checking these out now. >2) I found best results here if I bucked up th

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

jdow wrote on Friday, June 10, 2005: >1) You need to visit http://www.rulesemporium.com/ and select at least > a few of the SARE rules sets. They do really help SA performance. I'm checking these out now. >2) I found best results here if I bucked up the BAYES_99 rule to 5 > points. So far I h

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Thomas Cameron wrote on Friday, June 10, 2005: >I have SA (plus spamass-milter to reject, but that's not important for >this discussion) on a bunch of servers at various client sites. All of >them except one just flat stop spam. Period. Those clients are just >tickled pink with the results. > >

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Steven Dickenson wrote on Friday, June 10, 2005: >James Bucanek wrote: >> Greetings, As you can see, the Bayes filter has nailed it as spam, >> but it still only gets a score of 3.6. > >Bayes scores are really quite low in SA v3 - 3.0.2. You may want to >upgrade to 3.0.3 to get the newer Bayes s

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Why such teeny tiny letters? None of us here seem to have teeny tiny eyes.   {O.O} - Original Message - From: Andy Jezierski To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Sent: 2005 June, 10, Friday 11:22 Subject: Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin? Dimitri Yioulos

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Dimitri Yioulos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/10/2005 01:00:51 PM: > > I hope you don't mind my breaking into this thread, but I have a question > regarding SA helpers.  My mail setup is sendmail with spamassassin, and I'm > using SARE rules and bayes.  Ours is a small shop (mail vol. about

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

On Friday June 10 2005 11:16 am, Thomas Cameron wrote: > On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 08:06 -0700, James Bucanek wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > I consider myself a "weekend" spam assassin. I run my own server > > (co-located), and have about a dozen users (mostly friends and family, > > but a few paying c

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

1) You need to visit http://www.rulesemporium.com/ and select at least a few of the SARE rules sets. They do really help SA performance. 2) I found best results here if I bucked up the BAYES_99 rule to 5 points. So far I have not seen that trigger a ham message with per user Bayes. That pe

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 08:06 -0700, James Bucanek wrote: > Greetings, > > I consider myself a "weekend" spam assassin. I run my own server > (co-located), and have about a dozen users (mostly friends and family, but a > few paying customers). But running a mail server isn't my day job. I don't

Re: Advice for a weekend spam assassin?

Running SpamAssassin is more of an art than a science. You'll probably catch more spam by picking up most of the rules at: http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules.htm Or better yet, use RulesDuJour: http://www.exit0.us/index.php?pagename=RulesDuJour Configure it up to get the rulesets you want, ru

  1   2   >