Oh, I see now, I thought it was only testing the sender.
Yes, one of the domains mentioned in the message body was listed.
Thanks!
Claudia
John Hardin escribió:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Claudia Burman wrote:
...if the URI is not listed in www.uribl.com ?
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Receiv
Claudia Burman wrote:
...if the URI is not listed in www.uribl.com ?
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from [...] (sending to my server)
Received: from pikachu.nic.ar (unknown [140.191.48.11])
by maderna.nic.ar (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E07D7049;
Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:23:19 -0200
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Claudia Burman wrote:
...if the URI is not listed in www.uribl.com ?
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from [...] (sending to my server)
Received: from pikachu.nic.ar (unknown [140.191.48.11])
by maderna.nic.ar (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E07D7049;
Claudia Burman wrote:
...if the URI is not listed in www.uribl.com ?
Another message from the same domain doesn't hit the rule
uribl.com checks embedded URIs in the message, not the from domain. The
content of the two messages was obviously different. One contained a
listed URI, the other
