On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 08:42:50PM +0100, Axb wrote:
>
> seems to me everybody is making an effort in disregarding the fact that the
> URI rule was hitting on a header and imo, that should not happen.
> This makes the whole uri behaviour even more unpredictable.
As already was established, all
On 25 Mar 2019, at 09:49, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> I can't see anywhere how smtps could mean multicast audio.
That may have been a different use for port 465? I was operating from memory.
I wasn't trying to do a ton of research on this. The point is 465 was a MSFT
thing that they did
On 2019-03-22 21:43, Grant Taylor wrote:
On 3/22/19 7:01 PM, Dave Warren wrote:
To me, the big one is this: It sets your users up for failure. If a
user configures their client on a network that allows unrestricted
port 25 access and later moves (temporarily or permanently) to a
network that
On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 13:49 -0600, Rick Gutierrez wrote:
>
> https://pastebin.com/nsJ4PUBM
>
I'd use awk to extract information from logs like that rather than
messing around with an assemblage of grep and sed held together with
bash glue: its exactly the sort of job that awk was written to
El lun., 25 mar. 2019 a las 14:28, Grant Taylor
() escribió:
>
> It looks like the spam-tag log may have part of what you want.
>
> awk '($7 == "spam-tag," && $11 == "Yes,"){print "From: " $8; print "To:
> " $10; print "Score: " $12}'
>
> I don't know how well it will paly when you have multiple
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:49:49PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
You could try something nasty like
uri __HAS_URI /./
tflags __HAS_URI multiple
meta __REALLY_HAS_URI (DKIM_SIGNED && __HAS_URI > 1) || (!DKIM_SIGNED &&
__HAS_URI)
Efficiency note: if you're only
On 3/25/19 1:49 PM, Rick Gutierrez wrote:
https://pastebin.com/nsJ4PUBM
It looks like the spam-tag log may have part of what you want.
awk '($7 == "spam-tag," && $11 == "Yes,"){print "From: " $8; print "To:
" $10; print "Score: " $12}'
I don't know how well it will paly when you have
On 25 Mar 2019, at 13:02, David B Funk wrote:
For example, I've seen increasing amounts of spam which contain cloud
based URLs in the body of the message (worthless for URIBL filtering)
which may also contain URLs in the headers that are specific to the
spammer source (thus viable targets for
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Axb wrote:
On 3/25/19 7:01 PM, Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:49:49PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
Am 25.03.19 um 15:18 schrieb Henrik K:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
[snip..]
uri __HAS_URI /./
tflags __HAS_URI multiple
meta
El lun., 25 mar. 2019 a las 9:44, Kris Deugau () escribió:
> That looks to be far too complicated for most purposes, and reading back
> and forth I don't think it's even intended for the standard spamd
> logging; it's looking at log traces from some other SA library caller
> entirely. Can you
On 3/25/19 7:01 PM, Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:49:49PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
Am 25.03.19 um 15:18 schrieb Henrik K:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
You are matching "any uri" and expect it to be "reliable"? Perhaps consider
first what you are trying to
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:49:49PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
>
> Am 25.03.19 um 15:18 schrieb Henrik K:
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
> >
> > You are matching "any uri" and expect it to be "reliable"? Perhaps consider
> > first what you are trying to accomplish. Your way
Am 25.03.19 um 15:18 schrieb Henrik K:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
>
> You are matching "any uri" and expect it to be "reliable"? Perhaps consider
> first what you are trying to accomplish. Your way will match mailto: and
> strings like perl.pl etc, but perhaps
On 25 Mar 2019, at 7:09, Tobi wrote:
Hello
we're running spamassassin 3.4.2 and have the issue that one of our
rules which tests for existence of a url always sez url found for our
test message. Although the message body does not contain a url
uri __HAS_URI/\S/
After running
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Tobi wrote:
Hello
we're running spamassassin 3.4.2 and have the issue that one of our
rules which tests for existence of a url always sez url found for our
test message. Although the message body does not contain a url
uri __HAS_URI/\S/
After running
And didn't Microsoft start using it for their non-standard email in Windows 95?
I'm not sure how non-standard Microsoft's use of SMTP-over-TLS (SMTPS /
TCP port 465) is. The closest thing I remember to non-standard nature
was that they were atypical in their choice of preferring SMTP-over-TLS
Rick Gutierrez wrote:
Hi list , I need to do a trace of all the messages that spamassassin
cataloged as spam yesterday, I have found a bash statement but I do
not make it work, some idea that it may be failing, I am using centos
6 and spamassassin 3.4.2
grep "$(date +"%b %_d" -d "yesterday")"
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 02:54:39PM +, RW wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:18:19 +0200
> Henrik K wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi
> > wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Am 25.03.19 um 13:25 schrieb Henrik K:
> > > >
> > > > Use /^https?:/ to find real uris.
> > > >
>
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:18:19 +0200
Henrik K wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi
> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Am 25.03.19 um 13:25 schrieb Henrik K:
> > >
> > > Use /^https?:/ to find real uris.
> > >
> >
> > what if the scheme is ftp (or something else) or fully missing just
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 03:00:30PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 25.03.19 um 13:25 schrieb Henrik K:
> >
> > Use /^https?:/ to find real uris.
> >
>
> what if the scheme is ftp (or something else) or fully missing just the URI?
Then use /^(https?|ftp):/i? Are you expecting more, gopher
Hi
Am 25.03.19 um 13:25 schrieb Henrik K:
>
> Use /^https?:/ to find real uris.
>
what if the scheme is ftp (or something else) or fully missing just the URI?
Think that approach is not so much reliable ;-)
Found this config param in the docs "parse_dkim_uris" which defaults to
1. But set it to
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:09:32PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
> Hello
>
> we're running spamassassin 3.4.2 and have the issue that one of our
> rules which tests for existence of a url always sez url found for our
> test message. Although the message body does not contain a url
>
> uri __HAS_URI
On 24 Mar 2019, at 19:06, Reindl Harald wrote:
> well, given all that technical bullshit you are talking on several lists
> at least for 5 years better shut up...
I asked you to stop emailing me directly, so stop emailing me directly.
--
Well I've seen the Heart of Darkness/Read the writing
23 matches
Mail list logo
