The test message you included did not contain any of your whitelist
addresses. If you want to test the whitelist, you have to use a message
that will match.
Bowie
Tony Guadagno wrote:
> Bowie,
> thanks for your response. Here is the test message
>
>
<SNIP>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> Tony Guadagno
> Guadagno Consulting
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 585.703.6700
> ***********************************************
>
> > > > Bowie Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/29/2007 10:55 AM >>>
> Tony Guadagno wrote:
> > Ok,
> > I am a little frustrated. I am missing something and I don't see
> > it.
> >
> > All I am trying to do is
> >
> > whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > etc
> >
> > but it seems that there are no whitelist test running ....why?
> >
> > Content analysis details: (7.6 points, 5.6 required)
> >
> > pts rule name description
> > ---- ----------------------
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > 0.0 MISSING_MID Missing Message-Id: header
> > 0.0 MISSING_DATE Missing Date: header
> > -0.0 NO_RELAYS Informational: message was not relayed
> > via SMTP
> > 2.5 MISSING_HB_SEP Missing blank line between message
> > header and body
> > 1.3 MISSING_HEADERS Missing To: header
> > 2.0 BAYES_80 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 80 to
> > 95% [score: 0.8387]
> > 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT Missing Subject: header
> > -0.0 NO_RECEIVED Informational: message has no Received
> > headers
> > 0.0 NO_HEADERS_MESSAGE Message appears to be missing most
> > RFC-822 headers
> >
> > I am using sa 3.2.2 and for now, just testing using
> > spamassassing.bat I have --lint and everything seems ok.
> >
> >
> > why is it not whitelisting!!!
>
> The scores you posted seem to indicate that the message you sent to
> spamassassin has no headers. What does your test message look like
> and
> how did you do the test?
>
> Also, "whitelist_from" is a very bad idea in general. It can be
> fooled
> VERY easily. Once you fix the problem and get the whitelist_from
> working, you should change it to "whitelist_from_rcvd" or
> "whitelist_from_spf", which are much more resistant to spoofing.
