On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:04:29AM -0600, Kenneth Olsen wrote:
> The local.cf is set to add *SPAM ** to the subject line. No changes
> to the subject line.
> Next I'm thing the white list and / or black list entries are incorrect and
> the system is not reading past a point. Get the virgi
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 11:04:12PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
> Ollie, Something isn't adding up in a big way. Have you run spamassassin
> --lint lately? Perhaps SA is getting heavily confused.
Indeed you are right about things not adding up.
>
> Is there any chance you could re-run the messag
At 08:46 PM 1/11/2005, List Mail User wrote:
Every one seem to be missing the forged HELO which (incorrectly) used
the IP address of the receiving machine. This seems to have fooled both your
MTA; The critical headers are:
> > Received: from 61.32.186.51 by kukla (envelope-from
<[EMAIL P
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 11 18:23:25 2005
>...
>
>On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 05:46:58PM -0800, List Mail User wrote:
>> Every one seem to be missing the forged HELO which (incorrectly) used
>> the IP address of the receiving machine. This seems to have fooled both your
>> MTA; The criti
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 05:46:58PM -0800, List Mail User wrote:
> Every one seem to be missing the forged HELO which (incorrectly) used
> the IP address of the receiving machine. This seems to have fooled both your
> MTA; The critical headers are:
>
> > > Received: from 61.32.186.51 by kuk
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 07:54:56PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 07:26 PM 1/11/2005, Ollie Acheson wrote:
> >The message below passed through spamassassin with a -93.1 score as a
> >result
> >of a -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST, but my user.prefs has nothing resembling the
> >information in "From:"
>
>
Every one seem to be missing the forged HELO which (incorrectly) used
the IP address of the receiving machine. This seems to have fooled both your
MTA; The critical headers are:
> > Received: from 61.32.186.51 by kukla (envelope-from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > uid
71) with qmail-scanner-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler writes:
> At 07:42 PM 1/11/2005, Justin Mason wrote:
> >Ollie Acheson writes:
> > > The message below passed through spamassassin with a -93.1 score as a
> > result
> > > of a -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST, but my user.prefs has nothing resembl
At 07:42 PM 1/11/2005, Justin Mason wrote:
Ollie Acheson writes:
> The message below passed through spamassassin with a -93.1 score as a
result
> of a -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST, but my user.prefs has nothing resembling the
> information in "From:"
what about the info in Return-Path:?
Justin.. The Re
At 07:26 PM 1/11/2005, Ollie Acheson wrote:
The message below passed through spamassassin with a -93.1 score as a result
of a -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST, but my user.prefs has nothing resembling the
information in "From:"
1) you checked your user_prefs (hopefully not user.prefs) did you check the
*res
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ollie Acheson writes:
> The message below passed through spamassassin with a -93.1 score as a result
> of a -100 USER_IN_WHITELIST, but my user.prefs has nothing resembling the
> information in "From:"
what about the info in Return-Path:?
>
> Spamas
11 matches
Mail list logo
