On 3/5/19 4:44 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, Dave Jones wrote:
On 3/5/19 12:24 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, Bill Cole wrote:
On 5 Mar 2019, at 12:33, John Hardin wrote:
Attempting to grab the latest published rules update (using a
utility script I wrote) I get
On 3/5/19 12:24 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, Bill Cole wrote:
On 5 Mar 2019, at 12:33, John Hardin wrote:
Attempting to grab the latest published rules update (using a utility
script I wrote) I get this:
Latest revision: 1854751
wget
On 3/2/19 10:54 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I have a script which links to:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20180922=%2FDNSWL
This is a search of the latest network mass-check for rules matching
/DNSWL.
Between 2018-09-22 and 2018-09-29, that started getting redirected to
On 2/20/19 7:48 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Dave Jones skrev den 2019-02-20 03:30:
Let's say example.com sent email from sendgrid.net and DMARC passes
(SPF_PASS and alignment with the envelope-from domain or
DKIM_PASS_AU). I would like to subtract a few points in this case
without having to list
On 2/19/19 6:12 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Hi All,
Thoughts on how to fix this issue where sendgrid is hitting this rule?
3.2 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP
addr 1)
Example helo: o168-245-122-130.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net
On 9/24/18 8:30 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 9/24/2018 7:06 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
On 9/24/18 5:33 AM, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
I was updating links on one of our wiki pages to https when I
discovered that
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org does not take a https link.
Chrome reports
On 9/23/18 1:42 PM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 12:25:36PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
Consider the difference between these two SPF records:
# dig email.chase.com txt +short
"v=spf1 include:epsl1.com -all"
# dig chase.com txt +short
"v=spf1 a:spf.jpmchase.com ip
On 9/23/18 10:46 AM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 09:15:33AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
Keep in mind that these entries are usually subdomains that will not be
user/human mailboxes that can be compromised. These entries are verified to
be system-generated and have other rule
On 9/23/18 8:31 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 9/23/2018 9:04 AM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
I'm curious, are there guidelines on what can be added here? How are these
lists generated? Who verifies and checks that old domains don't age and go
to some spammers etc? Most of the listed stuff seems
On 08/20/2018 03:53 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 8/20/2018 4:47 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
You are correct. Only trunk is used for masscheck and ruleqa
promotions so the rules do need to contain version checking.
OK, so 3.4 in SVN doesn't affect masscheck or ruleqa, right? Nothing
svn check's
You are correct. Only trunk is used for masscheck and ruleqa promotions
so the rules do need to contain version checking.
Dave
On 08/20/2018 12:20 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Looking for a sanity check on this.
Rules from RuleQA are ONLY published from trunk, correct?
So rule development
On 05/10/2018 11:08 AM, Axb wrote:
On 05/10/2018 05:09 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
On 10 May 2018, at 3:21 (-0400), Axb wrote:
Why is this needed?
It is not possible to rely on /usr/bin/perl existing or being the
"right" perl on some platforms. Most obviously, Perl was removed long
ago from the
On 05/10/2018 07:07 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Agreed that is a mistake. I am on the road. Who made the change?
Author: billcole
Date: Wed May 9 17:35:07 2018
New Revision: 1831272
On Thu, May 10, 2018, 07:57 Dave Jones <da...@apache.org
<mailto:da...@apache.org>> wrote:
On 05/10/2018 04:53 AM, Axb wrote:
Seems this also blew up my SA nightly masschecks
my temp fix for rule generation was do reinstate
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
and disable SA svn updates.
On 05/10/2018 09:21 AM, Axb wrote:
Index: mass-check
On 04/11/2018 05:18 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
On 11 Apr 2018, at 17:50 (-0400), Dave Jones wrote:
On 04/11/2018 04:29 PM, billc...@apache.org wrote:
Author: billcole
Date: Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
New Revision: 1828937
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1828937=rev
Log:
Google Forms has
On 04/11/2018 04:29 PM, billc...@apache.org wrote:
Author: billcole
Date: Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
New Revision: 1828937
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1828937=rev
Log:
Google Forms has generated spam, befouling the google.com reputation
Modified:
On 03/14/2018 01:06 AM, Saahil Sirowa wrote:
Hi Kevin,
I have a few questions regarding the GSoC project. They goes as follows:-
1) How am I supposed to share my first draft with the community. Should
I post the link in the mail or submit it on Apache website?
2) Can I take some ideas from this
On 03/11/2018 12:08 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 03/11, Dave Jones wrote:
On 03/11/2018 04:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2018-03-10.
20180310: Spam and ham are above threshold of 150,000:
http
On 03/11/2018 04:00 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 has not had a rule update since 2018-03-10.
20180310: Spam and ham are above threshold of 150,000:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20180310
20180310: Spam: 416659, Ham: 418483
The spam and ham counts
On 02/13/2018 01:25 PM, Michael Peddemors wrote:
On 18-02-13 11:16 AM, bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org wrote:
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=3972
Dave Jones <da...@apache.org> changed:
What |Removed
of the 50_scores.cf would have done the trick.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7417
--
Dave Jones
The current 60_whitelist_spf.cf is 11 years old. What does everyone
think about starting a 60_whitelist_auth.cf and extending this list to
known good senders like *@alertsp.chase.com and *@email.dropboxmail.com?
My SA platform has very good results with thousands of whitelist_auth
entries
This update was to allow us to enable sa-update again in a couple of
days. I did not experience this problem in my SA instances because I
had manually patched the DKIM.pm plugin to test out the new
DKIM_VALID_EF rule. Someone on the users list noted this so I did this
minor commit 1813573
23 matches
Mail list logo
