LuKreme a écrit :
> On 3-Sep-2009, at 15:33, mouss wrote:
>> check_helo_hostname_access hash:/etc/postfix/access_host
>
> If but this in my smtpd_helo_restrictions (with a warn_if_reject for
> right now), but where in the smtpd_recipient_restrictions do you
> recommend putting this?
>
>>
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 23:33 +0200, mouss wrote:
> Clunk Werclick a écrit :
> > On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 01:36 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> >> On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
> >>>
> >>> zgrep "address not listed" /var/lo
On 3-Sep-2009, at 15:33, mouss wrote:
check_helo_hostname_access hash:/etc/postfix/access_host
If but this in my smtpd_helo_restrictions (with a warn_if_reject for
right now), but where in the smtpd_recipient_restrictions do you
recommend putting this?
check_reverse_client_h
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, John Hardin wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, John Hardin wrote:
>
>> headerRDNS_LOCALHOST X-Spam-Relays-External =~ /^\[
>> ip=(?!127)\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+ rdns=localhost(?:\.localdomain)? /i
>> describe RDNS_LOCALHOST Sender's public rDNS is "localhost"
>>
>> It should be i
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, John Hardin wrote:
headerRDNS_LOCALHOST X-Spam-Relays-External =~ /^\[
ip=(?!127)\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+ rdns=localhost(?:\.localdomain)? /i
describe RDNS_LOCALHOST Sender's public rDNS is "localhost"
It should be in the 3.3.0 release if I understand the autopublication
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Sahil Tandon wrote:
# Warning: UNTESTED!
header LOCAL_RDNS X-Spam-Relays-Untrusted =~ /^[^\]]+ rdns=localhost /i
describe LOCAL_RDNS bogus localhost rDNS
scoreLOCAL_RDNS 10.0
Already in the sandbox at
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 09:46 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> > On 2-Sep-2009, at 23:19, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> > > zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> > > Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> > > hostname localhost
Clunk Werclick a écrit :
> On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 01:36 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
>> On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
>>
>>> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>>>
>>> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
>>> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56:
On 3-Sep-2009, at 10:00, Clunk Werclick wrote:
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 09:46 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
I believe the directive in postfix is reject_unknown_client_hostname.
As I understand it, this will not implicitly block PTR = 'localhost'
whilst leaving others alone. It may be possible in 2.6?? bu
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 09:46 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 2-Sep-2009, at 23:19, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> > zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> > Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> > hostname localhost
> > dig -x 222.252.239.56
> >
> > ...
> > ;; QUESTION
On 2-Sep-2009, at 23:19, Clunk Werclick wrote:
zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
hostname localhost
dig -x 222.252.239.56
...
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;56.239.252.222.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
;; ANSWER SECTION:
56.239.252
> > forgive me, why do you want all that crap into your spamassassin when
> > postfix can solve it for you without a hick ?
>
> Obvious answer: not everyone who uses SA uses postfix.
Another slightly less obvious: to let autolearning see what new
crap it has to learn, and/or to check rules effecti
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 16:00 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Thu 03 Sep 2009 03:05:50 PM CEST, Justin Mason wrote
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> >> On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
> >>> Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu 03 Sep 2009 03:05:50 PM CEST, Justin Mason wrote
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
if it can be implemented?
forgive
On Thu 03 Sep 2009 03:05:50 PM CEST, Justin Mason wrote
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
if it can be implemented?
forgive me, why do you want al
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
hostname localhost
dig -x 222.252.239.56
...
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;56.239.252.222.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR
;; ANSWER SECTION:
56.239.252.222
> > On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
> >> Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
> >> if it can be implemented?
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> > forgive me, why do you want all that crap into your spamassassin when
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:18, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
>
>> Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
>> if it can be implemented?
>
> forgive me, why do you want all that crap into your spamassassin when
> postf
On Thu 03 Sep 2009 07:19:35 AM CEST, Clunk Werclick wrote
Forgive the stupidity of the question, but I'm not sure how to, or even
if it can be implemented?
forgive me, why do you want all that crap into your spamassassin when
postfix can solve it for you without a hick ?
--
xpoint
Clunk Werclick wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 05:23 -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>> Clunk Werclick wrote:
>>
>>> Howdie;
>>>
>>> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>>>
>>> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
>>> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.5
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 05:23 -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> Clunk Werclick wrote:
> > Howdie;
> >
> > I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
> >
> > zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> > Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> > hostname
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Clunk Werclick wrote:
>
>> Howdie;
>>
>> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>>
>> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
>> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
>> hostname localhost
>> dig -x 222.252.239.56
>
Clunk Werclick wrote:
> Howdie;
>
> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>
> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> hostname localhost
> dig -x 222.252.239.56
>
> ...
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;56
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 01:36 -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
>
> > I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
> >
> > zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> > Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> >
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009, Clunk Werclick wrote:
> I'm starting to see plenty of these and they are new to us:
>
> zgrep "address not listed" /var/log/mail.info
> Sep 3 05:26:59 : warning: 222.252.239.56: address not listed for
> hostname localhost
> dig -x 222.252.239.56
>
> ...
> ;; QUESTION SE
25 matches
Mail list logo