On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 03:55 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On fre 24 sep 2010 00:55:17 CEST, Chris wrote
>
> > Do I have def_whitelist_from_dkim configured incorrectly?
>
> no dkim is fine, just dont skip more spam tests based on def_*
>
These are the only two def_ lines I have:
def_whitelist_
On fre 24 sep 2010 00:55:17 CEST, Chris wrote
Do I have def_whitelist_from_dkim configured incorrectly?
no dkim is fine, just dont skip more spam tests based on def_*
--
xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
http://pastebin.com/ypiHcyvK
The above phish for my ISP came in this morning, it triggered the short
circuit 'ham' rule. Is it because I have this in my local.cf and the
message has a dkim signature?
def_whitelist_from_dkim *...@embarqmail.com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=embarqmail.com; s
gone ?
--
xpoint
Hi All,
On 17/09/10 14:11, Steve Freegard wrote:
Hi All,
Recently I've been getting a bit of filter-bleed from a bunch of spams
injected via Hotmail/Yahoo that contain shortened URLs e.g. bit.ly/foo
that upon closer inspection would have been rejected with a high score
if the real URL had been
