On 11/6/10 3:19 AM, Bill Landry wrote:
On 11/5/2010 11:40 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
You could try something like:
don't forget the tflag 'noautolearn' since the
On 11/6/2010 12:50 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 00:41:53 -0700
Bill Landry wrote:
You could also test the envelope sender:
header SPAMHAUS_ENV eval:check_rbl_envfrom('SPAMHAUS_ENV',
'_vouch.dwl.spamhaus.org.')
But that's an abuse... you should not be using Vouch-by
On 11/06, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new
> spamhaus whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
Thanks for mentioning it. This is based on the DNSWL rules and linted and
loaded, but only seconds ago, so not tested, please proofre
- "Joseph Brennan" wrote:
> --On Saturday, November 6, 2010 2:40 AM -0400 "Dan Mahoney, System
> Admin"
> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new
> spamhaus
> > whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
> >
> > -Dan
>
>
> Has a paying
--On Saturday, November 6, 2010 2:40 AM -0400 "Dan Mahoney, System Admin"
wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
-Dan
Has a paying customer got an answer from Spamhaus about an rsync feed?
I've as
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 00:41:53 -0700
Bill Landry wrote:
You could also test the envelope sender:
header SPAMHAUS_ENV eval:check_rbl_envfrom('SPAMHAUS_ENV',
'_vouch.dwl.spamhaus.org.')
But that's an abuse... you should not be using Vouch-by-r
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 00:41:53 -0700
Bill Landry wrote:
> You could also test the envelope sender:
> header SPAMHAUS_ENV eval:check_rbl_envfrom('SPAMHAUS_ENV',
> '_vouch.dwl.spamhaus.org.')
But that's an abuse... you should not be using Vouch-by-reference unless
either DKIM or SPF returns
On 11/6/2010 12:19 AM, Bill Landry wrote:
On 11/5/2010 11:40 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
You could try something like:
header SPAMHAUS_SWL eval:check_rbl('SPAMHA
On 11/5/2010 11:40 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
All,
Has anyone come up with a ruleset yet to score against the new spamhaus
whitelists, and deduct points appropriately?
You could try something like:
header SPAMHAUS_SWL eval:check_rbl('SPAMHAUS_SWL', 'swl.spamhaus.org.')
describe SP
Hi
if you use sendmail you can add
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]OK
to your access file in /etc/mail
dont forget to
/usr/sbin/makemap hash /etc/mail/access < /etc/mail/access
Matthias
Bill Landry schrieb:
Jean-Paul Natola wrote the following on 3/27/2007 7:36 AM -0800:
Hi everyone,
I ha
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, maillist wrote:
maillist wrote:
An easy way would be to:
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Others here will say that is not a good idea, because of how easy it is to
spoof. But to me, saying anything about spoofs when referring to Africans,
can be harmful to your
maillist wrote:
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have a contact from Africa whom I put on the whitelist because
everytime he
would send mail the scores went through the roof-
Recently he started getting this:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [41.204.40.26] blocked
using
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have a contact from Africa whom I put on the whitelist because everytime he
would send mail the scores went through the roof-
Recently he started getting this:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [41.204.40.26] blocked using
sbl-xbl.spamhaus.or
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
> Recently he started getting this:
>
> 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [41.204.40.26]
> blocked using sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org;
> http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL52368
>
> What "fix" can I do to enable him to send to us agai
Jean-Paul Natola wrote the following on 3/27/2007 7:36 AM -0800:
Hi everyone,
I have a contact from Africa whom I put on the whitelist because everytime he
would send mail the scores went through the roof-
Recently he started getting this:
554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [41.204
15 matches
Mail list logo
