On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:39:15AM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Ok, here's one that does fail:
under 3.2.0:
[16543] dbg: uridnsbl: domain theauthenticmemento.com listed
(URIBL_RHS_URIBL_BLACK): 127.0.0.2
[...]
Under 3.1.8:
[...]
[19829] dbg: uridnsbl: domain theauthenticmemento.com listed
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 12:33:16PM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Well, that doesn't show up in the list either...
I haven't really looked at 3.2 in a while, but the rule seems to have a
score 0. A random guess, without seeing the rest of your debug output,
is that URIBL_BLACK is marked as a
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 12:46 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:39:15AM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Ok, here's one that does fail:
under 3.2.0:
[16543] dbg: uridnsbl: domain theauthenticmemento.com listed
(URIBL_RHS_URIBL_BLACK): 127.0.0.2
[...]
Under 3.1.8:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 11:57 -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 12:46 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:39:15AM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Ok, here's one that does fail:
Based on your debug quoting, 3.2 does not show a URIBL_BLACK hit, it
On Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:41 PM Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 12:33:16PM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Well, that doesn't show up in the list either...
I haven't really looked at 3.2 in a while, but the rule seems to have
a score 0. A random guess, without seeing the
Jason Bertoch wrote:
On Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:41 PM Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 12:33:16PM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
Well, that doesn't show up in the list either...
I haven't really looked at 3.2 in a while, but the rule seems to have
a score 0. A random guess,
Jon
Yes this functionality has been built in since SA version 3.0 (and via
an additional 'plugin' since 2.6.?4?).
Make sure you are using network tests, Net::DNS perl module is installed
and the URI-RBL plugin is enabled in the *.pre files which are located
in the same place as local.cf
I have Net::DNS module installed.
[14934] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[14934] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.57
and
[14934] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL from
@INC
[14934] dbg: plugin: registered
@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: URIBL
I have Net::DNS module installed.
[14934] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[14934] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.57
and
[14934] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL from
@INC
[14934] dbg: plugin: registered
Mail
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:46:36 +, Jon Bjorn Njalsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have Net::DNS module installed.
[14934] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[14934] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.57
and
[14934] dbg: plugin: loading Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL from
@INC
Jon Bjorn Njalsson wrote:
Is it possible to have SA find URL in a mail and lookup the ipaddress
for the URL and check if that ipaddress is listed in some rbl zone and
score acordingly.
Example, I reveice lot of spam containing URL like
http://www.thesillyguy.info or thenopers.info and these
From: Mark G. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I have a problem with incorrect URIBL hits on incoming forwarded
messages
that have been mangled by Lotus Notes.
I have a customer with the domain name Yimaging.com.
(Not really Y).
ng.com is on the URIBL blacklist. I think
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
uridnsbl_skip_domain ng.com
{raspberry}
--
John Hardin KA7OHZICQ#15735746http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED]
key: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Mark G. Thomas wrote:
Does anyone have suggestions other than discontinuing use of the
URIBL or using a much lower score? Is there some way to fix this
code to make it more resilient to Lotus Notes text mangling? Is
there some easy way I can exclude just the one domain
On Monday, August 7, 2006, 1:56:41 PM, DAve DAve wrote:
In frustration I edited /etc/resolv.conf and removed 127.0.0.1, URI
lookups are completing and MailScanner is blasting through the queues on
both machines exceedingly fast now.
No idea what could have possibly changed, dnscache is
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Monday, August 7, 2006, 1:56:41 PM, DAve DAve wrote:
In frustration I edited /etc/resolv.conf and removed 127.0.0.1, URI
lookups are completing and MailScanner is blasting through the queues on
both machines exceedingly fast now.
No idea what could have possibly changed,
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Monday, August 7, 2006, 1:56:41 PM, DAve DAve wrote:
In frustration I edited /etc/resolv.conf and removed 127.0.0.1, URI
lookups are completing and MailScanner is blasting through the queues on
both machines exceedingly fast now.
No idea what could have possibly changed,
On Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 7:53:45 AM, Rick Macdougall wrote:
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Monday, August 7, 2006, 1:56:41 PM, DAve DAve wrote:
In frustration I edited /etc/resolv.conf and removed 127.0.0.1, URI
lookups are completing and MailScanner is blasting through the queues on
both machines
On Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 8:05:04 AM, DAve DAve wrote:
I had no logging running on dnscache before so I don't *know* what was
happening. I re-enabled logging and the issue went away. To be specific
I changed my run file from
exec setuidgid Gdnslog multilog -*
to
exec setuidgid Gdnslog
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 7:53:45 AM, Rick Macdougall wrote:
Unlikely to be a dnscache issue. I run over 10 SA servers, all with
local djb dnscaches.
Aha, but do you use Linux or FreeBSD?
I can't remember the details but I remember a FreeBSD/SA issue
recently.
Hi,
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 8:05:04 AM, DAve DAve wrote:
I had no logging running on dnscache before so I don't *know* what was
happening. I re-enabled logging and the issue went away. To be specific
I changed my run file from
exec setuidgid Gdnslog multilog -*
to
exec
DAve wrote:
[snip]
If it happens again I'll have some logs, provided I catch it in time,
dnscache makes logs like bunnies make more bunnies.
Until then I'm inclined to think it was a resource issue or anomaly on
my system rather than an issue with SA or dnscache. I run dnscache on
all my
Dhawal Doshy wrote:
DAve wrote:
[snip]
If it happens again I'll have some logs, provided I catch it in time,
dnscache makes logs like bunnies make more bunnies.
Until then I'm inclined to think it was a resource issue or anomaly on
my system rather than an issue with SA or dnscache. I run
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, DAve wrote:
Dhawal Doshy wrote:
Dave, you might need to update the 'root/servers/@' file. IIRC, a couple of
root servers have changed in the past few years.
We replace the @ file with one of our own on every server. I contains just
our dns servers and our own caches.
Logan Shaw wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, DAve wrote:
Dhawal Doshy wrote:
Dave, you might need to update the 'root/servers/@' file. IIRC, a
couple of root servers have changed in the past few years.
We replace the @ file with one of our own on every server. I contains
just our dns servers and
DAve wrote:
Good morning,
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and SURBL.
I did a test,
host -tTXT test.uribl.com.multi.uribl.com
and got the proper response. I also ran
spamassassin -D testemail.txt
which is a message with a URI known in the URIBL list and it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and
SURBL. I did a test,
...
I should have included this in the debug output.
[23441] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[23441] dbg: dns: Net::DNS version: 0.57
DAve wrote:
DAve wrote:
Good morning,
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and
SURBL. I did a test,
host -tTXT test.uribl.com.multi.uribl.com
and got the proper response. I also ran
spamassassin -D testemail.txt
which is a message with a URI known in the URIBL
Richard wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and
SURBL. I did a test,
...
I should have included this in the debug output.
[23441] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[23441] dbg: dns: Net::DNS
DAve wrote:
Richard wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and
SURBL. I did a test,
...
I should have included this in the debug output.
[23441] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
[23441] dbg: dns:
DAve wrote:
DAve wrote:
Richard wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I noticed this morning that I am no longer hitting any URIBL and
SURBL. I did a test,
...
I should have included this in the debug output.
[23441] dbg: dns: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
On Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 1:26:32 PM, Brian Leyton wrote:
I'm relatively new to SpamAssassin, but I've managed to get it working well
in conjunction with MimeDefang. I'm having a strange problem though, which
I hope someone can help me figure out.
I'm on a hobby mailing list, and
Jeff Chan wrote:
What version of SpamAssassin are you using? There is a bug
in 3.0.x that can cause intermittent errors like this.
Spamassassin -V reports:
SpamAssassin version 3.0.4
running on Perl version 5.8.6
Brian Leyton
IT Manager
Commercial Petroleum Equipment
On Wednesday, December 7, 2005, 8:14:43 AM, Brian Leyton wrote:
Jeff Chan wrote:
What version of SpamAssassin are you using? There is a bug
in 3.0.x that can cause intermittent errors like this.
Spamassassin -V reports:
SpamAssassin version 3.0.4
running on Perl version 5.8.6
Brian
Jeff Chan wrote:
OK I can't remember if that one has the bug fix or not. 3.1
definitely does.
What was the specific FP domain?
Here's the scoring section of the SA report:
Content analysis details: (5.5 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
On Wednesday, December 7, 2005, 8:31:06 AM, Brian Leyton wrote:
Jeff Chan wrote:
OK I can't remember if that one has the bug fix or not. 3.1
definitely does.
What was the specific FP domain?
Here's the scoring section of the SA report:
Content analysis details: (5.5 points, 5.0
Jeff Chan wrote:
Thanks. americanbroadcastdx.com was never on any SURBLs, so
it's probably the bug. Please consider upgrading to 3.1 or
possibly even 3.0.5 as this may fix the bug:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=3997
The developers will know for sure about
Brian Leyton wrote:
I'm relatively new to SpamAssassin, but I've managed to get it working well
in conjunction with MimeDefang. I'm having a strange problem though, which
I hope someone can help me figure out.
I'm on a hobby mailing list, and occasionally emails to this list are being
Just to post back to the group on this one. It turns out the reason why
these were not working is because the user that amavisd ran as didn't have
permissions to see the directory that contained Net::DNS::Resolver For some
reason cpan installed it with root only permissions.
After I fixed the
From: Thomas Deliduka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I couldn't find an answer to this in the archives. My apologies if this is
there.
I ran a test on a spam (spamassassin -t spam) and within the rules that
matched it outputted these:
0.6 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist
Ask an amavisd-new expert. It's already part of SpamAssassin. Perhaps
amavisd-new overrides some of the SpamAssassin configurations? Good
luck with it.
{^_^}
From: Thomas Deliduka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But what configuration do I need to do to add it?
On 8/26/05 5:01 PM this was written:
From:
jdow wrote the following on 26/08/2005 22:08:
Ask an amavisd-new expert. It's already part of SpamAssassin. Perhaps
amavisd-new overrides some of the SpamAssassin configurations? Good
luck with it.
{^_^}
From: Thomas Deliduka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But what configuration do I need to do to add
Check out http://www.uribl.com/. Click on the Usage link on the left.
Cheers,
Phil
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
-Original Message-
From: Ron McKeating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 21 June 2005 12:03
To: SPAMASSASSIN
Subject: uribl
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 11:02:14PM +0100, Ben Wylie wrote:
For some reason I have had to put:
loadpluginMail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL
into my 25_uribl.cf and my custom uribl file to get this to work.
You definitely wouldn't need it twice, and you shouldn't be editing the
default
Rodney Green wrote:
Hello,
Where are URIBL scores configured?
The same place all the scores are configured.
The defaults are in /usr/share/spamassassin/50_scores.cf
Your over-rides should probably go in /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf.
You can edit the defaults, but if you edit 50_scores, it
On Monday, October 18, 2004, 4:18:54 AM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 02:14:27AM, Jeff Chan wrote:
I am using SA 3.0. So I add this to a new file and name in spamcop.cf ?
urirhssub URIBL_JP_SURBL multi.surbl.org.A 64
headerURIBL_JP_SURBL
101 - 146 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
