Lutz Petersen skrev den 2013-02-07 10:52:
Benny, even if we named equal - please read again, careful.
> * 1.7 URIBL_DBL_SPAM Contains an URL listed in the DBL blocklist
> * [URIs: thebinarysistema.com]
this test is domain based
That is no argument. Do you want to deactivate all SA rules that are
not ip based ??
i run with dnseval disabled, waste of memory, ip tests is done in mta
stage here
>Received: from unknown (HELO mail.mobile.de) (194.50.69.1)
unknown reverse dns ?
No, simply means incoming mail from a host that has not
authenticated.
more likely that its disabled on dns testing in mta, or you cant dig
+trace reverse-ptr-name with succes results, make sure this works
>Received: from derborse-fur-dummies.net (derborse-fur-dummies.net
[37.59.206.107])
> by mail.mobile.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for
<spamvic...@mobile.de>
IP address 37.59.206.107 is not whitelisted at dnswl.org. should i
repeat myself now ? :=)
No, read again. 37.59.206.107 is listed in the Spamhaus SBL
meanwhile..
spamassassin will see this if you have trusted_networks with dnswl ip
if you like to change how spamassassin works make a bug report on that,
this will just delay 3.4.x even more :/
Again: mail.mobile.de received a mail from a host that is listed in
the SBL.
Then forwarded this mail to an external address (our customer in this
case).
And suddenly this mail is not tagged as spam (as it would if mail
were received
directly) because of the -5.0 whitelist score in dnswl.
yes thats fair, you should ask them to test sbl in mta stage
