I just installed from scratch on another machine, NO modifications. The
delay and pb databases are all emply to start.
I found that not only do whitelisted email addresses bypass the URIBL but
they also bypass the Greylisting/Delaying. I suspect that it bypasses the
dnsbl too, but I can't test that. FYI, this is a win32 installation.
[Whitelisted] shows up in the logs and the message is passed along.
In the message:
X-Assp-Delay: not delayed (whitebox 64.233.184.237); 11 Sep 2008 18:31:04
-0400
shows up.
The penalty whitebox was empty when this test installation was started, as
was the delaydb.white and delaydb. There's only my test messages in.
This is just a guess, but is the whitelisted from address adding the sender
ip to the penalty whitebox and then this bypasses the delay and uribl
check? Or maybe a temporary internal variable is assp is set to have
whitebox = true if the email address is whitelisted?
It seems to me that even if the code whiteboxes an ip of a whitelisted
sender, if URIBL is set to Block, that should have priority when Do URI
Blocklist Validation for Whitelisted *(URIBLWL)* is checked. If whitelisted
email, whiteboxes the ip, and a whiteboxed ip allows uribl, that's pointless
to have the option for uriblwl. Yes?
On a separate but related question-
On the whitelist/redlist/tuplet screen on the web interface, the tuplet add
/ remove adds and removes from the delaydb.white right? If says "safelisted"
but that's the only place that that word appears.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
