>>> > > (spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) ==> [
>>> > > rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
>>> > > lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
>>> > That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix this? I'll
>>> > try updating
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Louis Guillaume wrote:
> > (spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) ==> [
> > rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
> > lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
> That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix th
Cedric Knight writes:
> On 07/07/10 23:26, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>
>> Louis Guillaume writes:
>>> I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
>>> our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
>>>
>>> My users are getting restless. Everytime their ISP c
On 07/07/10 23:26, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> Louis Guillaume writes:
>> I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
>> our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
>>
>> My users are getting restless. Everytime their ISP changes their IP
>> address I have
* Daniel McDonald :
> > I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
> > our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
>
> Usually, you listen for end-users on the submission port, and don't filter
> it for spam, just auth.
I recommend using the submissi
Louis Guillaume writes:
> On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) ==> [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
>>>
>>> That las
On 7/7/10 4:45 PM, "Louis Guillaume" wrote:
> On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) ==> [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
>
On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) ==> [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix this? I'l
Louis Guillaume writes:
>> I think what is supposed to happen is
>>
>>spamass-milter gets milter macros
>>
>>spamass-milter makes a synthetic Received: line that is *not* in the
>>message as received. This proxies for the Received: line that the
>>MTAe would add. The synthetic
On 6/10/10 8:13 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
Louis Guillaume writes:
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 03:08 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
> On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > > Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
> > > users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
> >
> > You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit
Louis Guillaume writes:
> On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
>>> Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
>>> users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
>>
>> You forgot to provide th
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the messages
On 6/9/10 2:40 AM, Daniel Lemke wrote:
Louis Guillaume-2 wrote:
2. When outgoing messages are checked, spamd tries to find a
user to run as using the recipient's address. The way this
is done is to use the user-portion of the recipient
address, which is absolutely insane!
Wh
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule does not prevent mail
from being scanned by SA. Clearly, because that is a SA rule...
What *does* prevent mail from being scanned by SA is *NOT* passing it to
SA in your MTA. I don't get your point.
Ok I just reread ur first post, I missunderstoo
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:51 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
> Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann :
> > On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
> > > On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
> > > using authentication (not SASL auth tho), additionally the wik
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann :
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
using authentication (not SASL auth tho), additionally the wiki
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule does not prevent mail
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
> On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
> using authentication (not SASL auth tho), additionally the wiki
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule does not prevent mail
from being scanned by SA. C
You only hit the ALL_TRUSTED when mail is from a trusted relay, surely
thats not going to happen if people are sending from a workstation
mail to the server doing the checking?
Yes, it does. The originating host ("workstation") is trusted not to
send spam, because the submission is authenticated
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 12:57 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
> Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann :
> > Anyway, if they are really properly authenticated, they should trigger
> > ALL_TRUSTED and hardly anything else. [...]
> According to the wiki:
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Rules/ALL_TRUSTED
>
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann :
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the messages being
scored ab
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
> Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
> users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the messages being
scored above the threshold. We absolute
Louis Guillaume-2 wrote:
>
> 2. When outgoing messages are checked, spamd tries to find a
> user to run as using the recipient's address. The way this
> is done is to use the user-portion of the recipient
> address, which is absolutely insane!
>
When using spamc to send a message t
Hi,
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
I understand that SA checks outbound messages, but I have discovered two
things, one of them rather disturbing:
1. I cannot find a way to simply trust authenticat
24 matches
Mail list logo
