Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

On 2023-01-06 at 17:23:50 UTC-0500 (Fri, 6 Jan 2023 16:23:50 -0600) Brian Conry is rumored to have said: Hi, First things first: * SpamAssassin version: 3.4.2 * Debian 10 I don't know what the Debian versioning status is, but that is a very old and very likely broken SA if it has not had

Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

On 1/8/2023 12:57 AM, Brian Conry wrote: ... Third, to expand on something I alluded to briefly, the emails in question are generated by a security appliance on our customer's network, in accordance with their security policy and posture. The warnings we're getting when our mail server

Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

your DNS forwarding to a service that is more helpful to your operations than AWS. In relation to some anti-spam sites used to check sender IPs, the advice is to not use any well-known DNS forwarder such as google 8.8.8.8. Running your own DNS server seems to be more acceptable to the anti-s

Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

Hello again, I'm replying to my own message because I don't want to single out anyone who has already replied. There was value in each of your responses. This is going to be a long email, and for that you have my apologies, but I can't think of any way to make it shorter without it sounding

Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

On 06.01.23 16:23, Brian Conry wrote: What I'm looking for is a way to tell SA to only run DNS checks on names that it finds in the headers of the message, i.e. to not scan the body of the message for names. the URIDNSBL does this and it produces very good results. By disabling this you are

Re: Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

I am 99% sure you will be unable to implement that in SA natively and easily without something such as a milter. Using mimedefang, we have significant code to allow people to submit samples to create the KAM ruleset and maintain the RBL. In short, I think we have solved the exact problem you're

Looking for advice about limiting DNS queries

Hi, First things first: * SpamAssassin version: 3.4.2 * Debian 10 * SA is created and invoked as a Perl object by a MIMEDefang filter What I'm looking for is a way to tell SA to only run DNS checks on names that it finds in the headers of the message, i.e. to not scan the body of the message

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

e a little long-winded). Once again, thanks to all. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other-tp121145p121232.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 06:50:55 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > (Note: For clarity, the > https://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.4.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html > link you provided IS the page I refer to when I say "reading the > wiki".) > > Ok, reading it again: it says > / >

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

jimimaseye wrote on 10/06/16 1:50 AM: > CONCLUSION: it was working as the book says (even though the book is not > clear WHY the book says what it says). It's been a very long while since I worked with this code and I have to kind of twist my mind up funny to keep it in my head all at once, but

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

essage in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other-tp121145p121223.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 02:54:34 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > FEEDBACK for all who have contributed: > > I have a result. > > It seems that the 'internal_networks' is only adhered to *in the > absence* of a 'trusted_networks' entry. If I remove the > 'trusted_networks', and simply leave: > >

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

uit ALL_TRUSTED" option set, as shown above). Only without a 'trusted' entry will an 'internal' entry get applied. I think we have all learned something there. Thanks to all. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluat

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

Yes it is but it all still works just as the linux version does. So is irrelevant actually (the only difference being its easier to install and setup on windows. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 12:49:03 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > On 08/06/2016 21:26, David B Funk [via SpamAssassin] wrote: > > Try running SA with the '--debug' option to see the explicit list of > > config files that it is reading. Make sure that it's reading yours > > and look at the ones that

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

er/environment that you test in is the same that is used > during > the processing of messages. > > Silly question, is some meta-framework involved in your system (EG > amavis, > etc..) > no, nothing. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, jimimaseye wrote: On 08/06/2016 16:05, Matus UHLAR - fantomas [via SpamAssassin] wrote: note that if a server acts as your MX, it should be listed in internal_networks, no matter if other company manages it. That applies for backup MX servers for your

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

ly to this email, your message will be added to the > discussion below: > http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other-tp121145p121189.html > > > To unsubscribe from Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other, > click he

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers (doing their own teats no doubt). Plus they dont have just the one

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:59:26 +0100 Kevin Golding wrote: > On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye > wrote: > > > Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider > > who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers >

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

> > Did you restart spamd? > > > > Effectively yes (but no not really). I am using commandline scanner > whilst doing the tests so the LOCAL.CF is being loaded each time I run > the test. When it is all working then I will restart my spamd daemon to > take effect for all incoming mail.

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

I did also test the TRUSTED_NETWORKS option as well (note: I tried "trusted" and "internal" network options before resorting to this maillist for advice). It results in: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on mailserver X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No,

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

daemon to take effect for all incoming mail. Proof that its working: when I added the "add_header all Relays-Untrusted" entries (at the same time as the internal_network entry) they immediately appeared in the spam report. -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.106534

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:49:17 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: Regarding the range: the range belongs to our mail host provider who receive the emails then pass them amongst their own servers (doing their own teats no doubt). Plus they dont have just the one

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 05:07:14 -0700 (MST) jimimaseye wrote: > * internal_networks 195.26.90.* Try to avoid using any mark-up (assuming that's what the "*"s are), it can be very confusing. > X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) > X-hMailServer-Spam: YES > X-hMailServer-Reason-1: Rejected by Spamhaus. -

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

at said, do you really need the whole block? > > You could just use 195.26.90.72 and 195.26.90.113 by the look of it. Even > if you control the whole block presumably only a limited number of hosts > should be relaying? > -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 13:07:14 +0100, jimimaseye <groachmail-stopspammin...@yahoo.com> wrote: I did try adding the "internal_networks 195.26.90. " option to my LOCAL.CF before, and in fact I have just tried it again based on your advice, but it doesnt make any d

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

_RELAYSUNTRUSTED_ > add_header all Relays-External _RELAYSEXTERNAL_ Thanks for your reply Kevin. You explanation of why the most recent relay is ignored makes sense, thanks for that. I did try adding the "internal_networks 195.26.90. " option to my LOCAL.CF before, and

Re: Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 07:22:19 +0100, jimimaseye wrote: 1, You can see that Spamassassin considered and evaluated the IP address 195.26.90.72 (as reported in its report). Now this is the SECOND received header in the list. And yet it doesnt evaluate

Advice: why one relay evaluated and not the other

found in Spamhaus would be appreciated. Thanks (I hope I havent managed to post this twice. Im still trying to understand how this mailing list operates). -- View this message in context: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Advice-why-one-relay-evaluated-and-not-the-other-tp121145.ht

Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: qmail-scanner[12013]: Clear:RC:0(216.170.115.184):SA:0(0.9/4.0): 4.409458 6225 comp...@franking-expert.co.uk u...@domain.com

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: qmail-scanner[12013]: Clear:RC:0(216.170.115.184):SA:0(0.9/4.0): 4.409458 6225

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On 08/29/2014 02:45 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl: qmail-scanner[12013]:

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On Aug 29, 2014, at 6:45 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp /root/weeklymail/Thumaillog:Aug 27 11:58:15 plesk3 qmail-scanner-queue.pl:

Re: Advice on how to block via a mail domain in maillog

On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 12:43 -0600, Philip Prindeville wrote: On Aug 29, 2014, at 6:45 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 8/29/2014 5:48 AM, emailitis.com wrote: I have a lot of Spam getting into our mail servers where the common thread is cloudapp You guys realize

Mojibake alert [Was: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP]

On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 07:37:36 -0700, Linda Walsh sa-u...@tlinx.org wrote: Karsten Brmojibake elided/ wrote: In addition to other problems with your posts (which experts here have already pointed out), your scripts clearly do not handle non-ASCII emails well, as you have completely mangled

Re: Mojibake alert [Was: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP]

On 8/18/2014 2:39 AM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: Karsten Brmojibake elided/ wrote: Karsten is a bit of mutated character (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojibake) :-)

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/16/2014 12:08 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote: The start of filtering out spam is filtering out mail that doesn't have a valid return address -- it's not valid email. I'm stuck because my ISP won't filter it out, I have to download it to find out that it's invalid, then local sendmail rejects it,

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 19:06:21 -0700 Linda A. Walsh sa-u...@tlinx.org wrote: My old email service was bought out by Megapath who is letting alot of services slide. [snip] Any ideas on how to get a cheapo-doesn't want to support anything ISP to start blocking all the garbage the pass on?

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Karsten Br�� wrote: Similarly, your scripts do not reject messages, but choose not to fetch them. === No... fetchmail fetches them, sendmail rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and spamassassin scripts get called after the

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Sunday 17 August 2014 at 16:37:36 (EU time), Linda Walsh wrote: No... fetchmail fetches them, sendmail rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and spamassassin scripts get called after the email makes it through sendmail. My scripts don't see the email.

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/15/2014 9:08 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote: I was wondering if anyone had any experience in showing their ISP the light... Oh well Linda, is your email domain tlinx.org? I'm assuming that it is because there is an under construction web page on that domain and I cannot imagine a

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/17/2014 7:37 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: Karsten Br�� wrote: Similarly, your scripts do not reject messages, but choose not to fetch them. === No... fetchmail fetches them, sendmail rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 07:37 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: Be liberal in what you accept, strict in what you send. In particular, later stages simply must not be less liberal than early stages. Your MX has accepted the message. My ISP's MX has accepted it, because

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 19:06 -0700, Linda A. Walsh wrote: My old email service was bought out by Megapath who is letting alot of services slide. My main issue is that my incoming email scripts follow the SMTP RFC's and if the sender address isn't valid, then it's not a valid email that

Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

My old email service was bought out by Megapath who is letting alot of services slide. My main issue is that my incoming email scripts follow the SMTP RFC's and if the sender address isn't valid, then it's not a valid email that should be forwarded. My script simply check for the domain

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Hi, The only response my ISP will give is to turn on their spam filtering. I tried that. In about a 2 hour time frame, over 400 messages were blocked as spam. Of those less than 10 were actually spam, the rest were from various lists. So having them censoring my incoming mail isn't gonna

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

Alex wrote: Hi, The only response my ISP will give is to turn on their spam filtering. I tried that. In about a 2 hour time frame, over 400 messages were blocked as spam. Of those less than 10 were actually spam, the rest were from various lists. So having them censoring my incoming

Advice re- SA 3.4.0

plug-ins, etc. There's a lot of really interesting looking stuff ... Just wondering if anyone had any advice along the lines you really must do this, or you'd be crazy to do that re- all the new stuff, etc? I'm particularly 'interested' in things relating to Bayes, which has bitten me

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 12:19 PM, hospice admin wrote: Just wondering if anyone had any advice along the lines you really must do this, or you'd be crazy to do that re- all the new stuff, etc? I'm particularly 'interested' in things relating to Bayes, which has bitten me in the rear so many times

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:49:32 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 12:19 PM, hospice admin wrote: Just wondering if anyone had any advice along the lines you really must do this, or you'd be crazy to do

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had a chance to look at the memory implications in more detail. We run a VM infrastructure here, so I'll load it up on one server and keep throwing resources at it until I have

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had a chance to look at the memory

Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

On 06/07/2014 01:33 PM, hospice admin wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 01:09 PM, hospice admin wrote: I was wondering about this one and had put it to one side until I had

RE: Advice re- SA 3.4.0

Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:43:37 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Advice re- SA 3.4.0 On 06/07/2014 01:33 PM, hospice admin wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 13:22:13 +0200 From: axb.li...@gmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

to verify the ham and spam just to ensure it's accurate and doesn't contain anything that shouldn't be there. Not reading every message but not finding any errors. Looking for advice at this point about anything I should be doing that I'm not, or any useful feedback.

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

. Looking for advice at this point about anything I should be doing that I'm not, or any useful feedback. -- Marc Perkel - Sales/Support supp...@junkemailfilter.com http://www.junkemailfilter.com Junk Email Filter dot com 415-992-3400

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

Am 13.02.2013 08:54, schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter: * Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de: Am 13.02.2013 05:13, schrieb Marc Perkel: I'm thinking about setting up to do nightly mass checks and looking for advice. Thanks in advance. I'm thinking about creating a virtual server that will receive

mass check tips and tricks - need advice

I'm thinking about setting up to do nightly mass checks and looking for advice. Thanks in advance. I'm thinking about creating a virtual server that will receive a forked copy of email that I pass that is delivered eith to ham@ or spam@ accounts. Does this sound reasonable? I have been using

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

Am 13.02.2013 05:13, schrieb Marc Perkel: I'm thinking about setting up to do nightly mass checks and looking for advice. Thanks in advance. I'm thinking about creating a virtual server that will receive a forked copy of email that I pass that is delivered eith to ham@ or spam@ accounts

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

* Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de: Am 13.02.2013 05:13, schrieb Marc Perkel: I'm thinking about setting up to do nightly mass checks and looking for advice. Thanks in advance. I'm thinking about creating a virtual server that will receive a forked copy of email that I pass

Re: mass check tips and tricks - need advice

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/13/2013 05:13 AM, Marc Perkel wrote: I'm thinking about setting up to do nightly mass checks and looking for advice. Thanks in advance. I'm thinking about creating a virtual server that will receive a forked copy of email that I pass

Re: Advice

On 07/03/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:25 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being

Advice

Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our SMTP servers. I have checked that none of our servers are listed on any databases, but after some

Re: Advice

wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our SMTP servers. I have checked that none of our servers are listed on any databases, but after

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our SMTP servers. I have checked that none of our servers

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:25 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:19 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: Looking for some advice, hope it's OK to ask here. I have a few customers over the past several months start getting an unusual amount of messages being blocked or returned when sending via our SMTP

Re: Advice

On 7/3/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I've had this set up for a while. I find the emails they send to be almost useless. I don't know if there is any benefit to simply being signed up. You get emails that basically say, someone thinks your email is junk, but we're not going to tell you

Re: Advice

On 7/3/12 2:34 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 7/3/2012 12:51 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: I've had this set up for a while. I find the emails they send to be almost useless. I don't know if there is any benefit to simply being signed up. The point isn't to remove the person complaining as

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, Jerry Pape wrote: Oops, further investigation indicates that Bayes is on--thought the default was off for my config. I would be inclined to turn it off as I have no decent way of teaching it beyond mass-config into the future--please advise. Training is critical. If

Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

All, [Not sure if this is the right place to send this--please correct me if I am in error] At some time in the not too distant past, my otherwise reliable SA system has broken in an odd way. This example is characteristic of the problem: Cheap Airline Tickets email received--clearly

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

On 10/17/2010 7:05 PM, Jerry Pape wrote: [snip] x-spam-status reads: No, score=3.8 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_40,HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG,MIME_HTML_ONLY,RDNS_NONE,URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no version=3.2.5 Assessment of this header at

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

On Sun, 2010-10-17 at 17:05 -0700, Jerry Pape wrote: At some time in the not too distant past, my otherwise reliable SA system has broken in an odd way. This example is characteristic of the problem: Can't follow. It is broken, because SA itself reports something different from an unrelated,

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, Jerry Pape wrote: [Not sure if this is the right place to send this--please correct me if I am in error] This is the place. Assessment of this header at http://www.futurequest.net/docs/SA/decode/ yields: TestScore Description BAYES_400.000 Bayesian

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, John Hardin wrote: There are four score sets to choose from based on what options you have enabled. The above is for scoreset 2, no BAYES + net tests. Crap. That should be scoreset 1. Sorry. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

Wow, I am grateful for the prompt answers, but I must say they have confused me. Bayes should not be on in my config and subsequent check of the GUI says its not--this may be wrong. Further, what are the scoreset indexes? I don't use Bayes because all of my clients are POP mail and they

Re: Seeking advice re: SA score discrepancies

Oops, further investigation indicates that Bayes is on--thought the default was off for my config. I would be inclined to turn it off as I have no decent way of teaching it beyond mass-config into the future--please advise. JP On 10/17/10 10:37 PM, Jerry Pape wrote: Wow, I am grateful for

Rather OT: Perl advice sought

I hope this isn't too OT for this list, but here goes: I've just copied and hacked the SentOutDB plugin and its associated rule to make a plugin for a private whitelist. The plugin queries a view of my PostgreSQL-based mail archive. This whitelists anybody that mail has been sent to. The plugin

Re: sql config problem - need advice

blahblah_destination_recipient_limit = 1 where blahblah is the transport that is used to pass mail to SA. in master.cf i have: smtp inet n - n - - smtpd -o content_filter=spamfilter:dummy and spamfilter unix - n n - - pipe user=spamfilter

Re: sql config problem - need advice

Daniel Chojecki wrote: blahblah_destination_recipient_limit = 1 where blahblah is the transport that is used to pass mail to SA. in master.cf i have: smtp inet n - n - - smtpd -o content_filter=spamfilter:dummy and spamfilter unix - n n - -

sql config problem - need advice

Hello, we use latest versions of postfix and spamassasin on slackware machines. Our postfix acts as smtp gateway - no local users. We want to set up white/blacklists per username. Spammassasin keeps white/black lists in sql. $GLOBAL definitions are working OK. Testing scenario: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sql config problem - need advice

On Tue, June 24, 2008 10:14, Daniel Chojecki wrote: Any idea ? problem is in mta not in spamassassin, mta sends to more then one to spamassassin, and scores with one in mind change this in mta so it just sends always to one recipient at a time, no matter how many you send to, that fixes the

Re: sql config problem - need advice

Daniel Chojecki wrote: Hello, we use latest versions of postfix and spamassasin on slackware machines. Our postfix acts as smtp gateway - no local users. We want to set up white/blacklists per username. Spammassasin keeps white/black lists in sql. $GLOBAL definitions are working OK. Testing

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

David B Funk wrote: Jo you didn't read Chris's statement closely. A conscientious mail server administrator will configure the SERVER to -ONLY- accept encrypted connections for SMTP-AUTH transactions; the server should enforce the encryption requirements. This is a religious war

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting Richard Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl and switch to zen.spamhaus? Please do

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting Skip [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am not certain how anyone can claim that they have no FPs running through those services unless they have prior knowledge of every inbound email. That is impossible. My company deals with on the order of thousands of companies and multiple times that in

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Jeff Chan wrote: Quoting Richard Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl and switch to zen.spamhaus

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting R.Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jeff Chan wrote: Quoting Richard Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus Is this wise, or should I

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

to block senders at MTA level ? Spamhaus, or spamcop ? I would like to hear some advice or maybe your current setup ? Thank you for any advice we can use . Greetings Richard I'm using reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org, reject_rbl_client

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, R.Smits wrote: | We use : sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org now. It does not include the PBL (policy | Block List) | | We serve a big university and we cannot afford False Positives. | I can imagine that someone one the PBL (home user) runs a small | mailserver and cannot connect to our

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

R.Smits wrote: Jeff Chan wrote: Quoting Richard Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thanks for all the advice.. I think we will be using spamhaus. I am running a test and it blocks a lot of spam. Currently I use the sbl.spamhaus and pbl.spamhaus Is this wise, or should I also use the xbl

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

list is safe enough to block senders at MTA level ? Spamhaus, or spamcop ? I would like to hear some advice or maybe your current setup ? Thank you for any advice we can use . Greetings Richard I'm using reject_rbl_client zen.spamhaus.org

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

Quoting mouss [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If they really run a normal MTA, and if that is authorized by their ISP, then they should ask to be unlisted. (They should also get a meaningful reverse DNS so that they can be identified). Otherwise, they should relay via their ISP... Indeed, one of the

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: Your server then enforces encryption and SMTP-AUTH, and the SSL will (hopefully) defeat any man-in-the-middle attacks by trans-proxies. That's exactly the problem I am reporting. A lot of mail clients

Re: [sa-list] Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, David B Funk wrote: On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Jo Rhett wrote: On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Chris Edwards wrote: Your server then enforces encryption and SMTP-AUTH, and the SSL will (hopefully) defeat any man-in-the-middle attacks by trans-proxies. That's exactly the problem I

Advice on MTA blacklist

senders at MTA level ? Spamhaus, or spamcop ? I would like to hear some advice or maybe your current setup ? Thank you for any advice we can use . Greetings Richard

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

to high for our organisation. Wich list is safe enough to block senders at MTA level ? Spamhaus, or spamcop ? I would like to hear some advice or maybe your current setup ? I would like to recommend this: (that includes rbl lists) http://jimsun.linxnet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt -- Byung

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

R.Smits wrote: Hello, Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix) smptd_client_restrictions Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is getting to high for our organisation. Wich list is

RE: Advice on MTA blacklist

None. I'd rather bump up my system resources than allow a system completely out of my control to assess whether or not mail should run through my MTA and SA. - Skip

Re: Advice on MTA blacklist

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 at 10:00 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabulated: Spamhaus: yes. Use zen.spamhaus.org (you might end up needing to pay for it, and use a local cache, if you're a heavy traffic site, but, frankly, it's worth paying for). We use Spamhaus here with their datefeed service. Our

  1   2   3   >