Sorry for the duplicate if this did make it through the first time - I
didn't see my echo, or any feedback, so I thought I'd send again.
I'm playing with a way to skip spamc altogether for local users (the third
case below) - not sure if that is the best way though as it certainly
involves a little more work than the default install (a more careful check
of Received headers BEFORE calling spamc) - but will try it anyways...
(thanks to Gordon Messmer) - at any rate, this other case seems to be a bug
in SA, so here it is again - will post the correct rule set to bypass if I
get it figured out.
Thanks.
m/
With the help of Shane Williams (who received a message and showed me how it
passed his SA ok) I figured out the following:
Courier formats it's received lines like this (this trips
RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK):
Received: from bigass1.XXX.com ([66.199.X.X])
by slim1.XXX.com with esmtp; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:56:09 +0000
Received: from a1200 ([24.83.X.X])
(AUTH: LOGIN [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bigass1.XXX.com with esmtp; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:56:09 +0000
Shane I presume (by version numbers) is running sendmail - which has a
different Received format and DOESN'T trip RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK:
Received: from bigass1.XXX.com (ns1.XXX.com [66.199.X.X])
by fiat.XXX.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
i06MBJ6U020255
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:11:19 -0600
Received: from a1200 ([24.83.X.X])
(AUTH: LOGIN [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bigass1.XXX.com with esmtp; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:09:53 +0000
So for starters, the "-notfirsthop" option seems to be missing my first
header.
And for seconds... I will still have a problem when my first header is
AUTHENTICATED.
If I send mail to myself, my ONLY received header looks like:
Received: from a1200 ([24.83.X.X])
(AUTH: LOGIN [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bigass1.XXX.com with esmtp; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:56:09 +0000
Which I think should be ignored - although headers can be forged, the first
header can't - right? And if it says authenticated, I shouldn't be penalized
for sending mail to myself - right?
So now what - do I file a bug report ? or have I already put the info in the
right place?
Thanks a bunch for the tool - glad to do my bit - I imagine that this
problem affects all courier users. Unless I'm missing something?
Thanks!
m/
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Sneddon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 4:55 AM
To: 'Mitch (WebCob)'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK,RCVD_IN_SORBS in 2.61 when
sending myself a test message?
Hi, Mitch.
Could you please provide more information regarding the mail server which is
running SpamAssassin? Information such as which MTA it's using, how you're
calling SpamAssassin (procmail, milter, etc.), and whether the machine is on
a private NATed address will be helpful in troubleshooting your problem.
Thanks.
Brian
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering
advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms.
Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
