Mark Martinec skrev den 2013-08-09 13:49:
There is currently (3.4.0) no specific IDN support yet,
mainly because not much of these have been observed in the wild.
okay, created
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6966
If the domain found in a mail body is encoded in puny
On Friday 09 August 2013 01:13:38 Benny Pedersen wrote:
> seen idn spamming urls here that is not tested in uridnsbl, have
> spamassassin 3.4.0 not idn support yet ?
>
> is it just missing tld defines for idn domains ?
>
> should it be filled a bug ?
There is currently (3.4.0) no specific IDN su
seen idn spamming urls here that is not tested in uridnsbl, have
spamassassin 3.4.0 not idn support yet ?
is it just missing tld defines for idn domains ?
should it be filled a bug ?
On 05.06.2006, at 18:40, Bowie Bailey wrote:
Christoph Reichenberger wrote:
[...snip...]
Not that I can think of. The next step is to look at the debug output
and see what is breaking.
spamassassin -D dns --lint
This will show you all of the DNS debugging info. If there is a
problem,
Theo Van Dinter wrote on Mon, 5 Jun 2006 12:42:13 -0400:
> btw, "spamassassin --lint -D uridnsbl" will just output the uridnsbl
> stuff. :)
Thanks for the info, Theo!
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 06:38:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You may want to run a simple debug:
>
> spamassassin -D --lint
>
> and look if URIDNSBL gets used and throws no errors.
btw, "spamassassin --lint -D uridnsbl" will just output the uridnsbl
stuff. :)
--
Randomly Generated Tagl
Christoph Reichenberger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's me once again. After all your help my BAYES is now running fine.
> Although I said, I wanted to wait a couple of days, the BAYES is
> running so fine now that I could not stand to go further.
> I already received a couple of spams that got BAYES_99, bu
>
From: "Kai Schaetzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
X-Rcpt-To:
Christoph Reichenberger wrote on Mon, 5 Jun 2006 18:30:53 +0200:
> I already received a couple of spams that got BAYES_99, but got
> a total of less than 5. All these mails are so suspicious that I
>
Hi,
it's me once again. After all your help my BAYES is now running fine.
Although I said, I wanted to wait a couple of days, the BAYES is
running so fine now that I could not stand to go further.
I already received a couple of spams that got BAYES_99, but got
a total of less than 5. All these ma
