On Wednesday, November 24, 2004, 3:12:10 PM, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
Sidney Markowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've reproduced the problem with debug on and verified that the URI is
not in SURBL according ti the checker website but is flagged by
SpamAssassin. I'll open a bugzilla ticket and
in 3 days.
--Chris
-Original Message-
From: Samat Jain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 2:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: hotnudiegirls.com URI as false positive
Hello,
When sending an e-mail to myself, I apparently got my message
We'd need a full example message that has been marked up as a false
positive, including the SpamAssassin headers, to be able to debug this.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Quinlan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 4:25 PM
To: Chris Santerre
Cc: 'Samat Jain'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
dev@spamassassin.apache.org; SURBL Discussion list (E-mail)
Subject: Re: hotnudiegirls.com URI as false
My guess is that the site was actually listed in SpamCop and Outblaze
(and may still be), but was either delisted by those lists or was
whitelisted by the SURBL folks.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
Sidney Markowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've reproduced the problem with debug on and verified that the URI is
not in SURBL according ti the checker website but is flagged by
SpamAssassin. I'll open a bugzilla ticket and attach the email and the
log output there.
I'll send an email
