Hi, Eric 2008/5/13 Erik Dasque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I checked the debug result of my a --lint and got: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin 2>&1 -D --lint | grep ounce > [13492] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::VBounce from @INC > [13492] dbg: config: fixed relative path: > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002004/updates_spamassassin_org/20_vbounce.cf > [13492] dbg: config: using > "/var/lib/spamassassin/3.002004/updates_spamassassin_org/20_vbounce.cf" for > included file > [13492] dbg: config: read file > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002004/updates_spamassassin_org/20_vbounce.cf > > This seems right, yes ? > > Erik > > > > On May 13, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Erik Dasque wrote: > > Anyone ? Do you get the same analysis with the attached message that I got ? > Is my VBounce setup wrong then ? > > Erik > > (did my message get ignored because of the text attachment ?) > > > On May 12, 2008, at 11:32 AM, Erik Dasque wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am having trouble with VBounce. I think I followed the FAQ to the letter > yet most of the backscatter still ends up in my mailbox. For example, if I > analyze the attached sample email (which I received this morning), I get the > following: > > [ .... ] > > > Spam detection software, running on the system "li9-234.members.linode.com", > has > identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message > has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label > similar future email. If you have any questions, see > root for details. > > Content preview: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended > recipients. > The e-mail account does not exist. Check the e-mail address or contact > the > recipient directly to confirm the address. "Devon Roy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [...] > > > Content analysis details: (-2.0 points, 3.0 required) > > pts rule name description > ---- ---------------------- > -------------------------------------------------- > -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% > [score: 0.0000] > 0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list > > > As you see, no bounce related analysis. However some messages get filtered > out as bounce (just not the one attached and quite a few of its bretheren) > which tells me it's at least working a bit : > > > > X-Spam-Report: * 1.9 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL > blocklist * [URIs: bambinidimanina.org] * 1.5 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains > an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: bambinidimanina.org] * > 2.0 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: > bambinidimanina.org] * 0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 > to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * 0.1 CRBOUNCE_MESSAGE Challenge-response > bounce message * 0.1 ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE Message is some kind of bounce > message > > > Any idea for me ?
Yup. Did you whitelist your servers? If you don't do it, SA doesn't know how to tell a legit bounce from UBE-generated bounces. You should have something like whitelist_bounce_relays my.server.name other.server.name in your local.cf. Then you'll start to notice how bounce notifications start to get tagged as spam. > > Erik > > > > <sample-vbounce.txt> > > > Regards, Luis -- _____________________________________ GNU/GPL: "May The Source Be With You... Linux Registered User #448382. _____________________________________
