* Daniel McDonald dan.mcdon...@austinenergy.com:
I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
Usually, you listen for end-users on the submission port, and don't filter
it for spam, just auth.
I
On 07/07/10 23:26, Greg Troxel wrote:
Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com writes:
I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
My users are getting restless. Everytime their ISP changes their IP
address
Cedric Knight ced...@gn.apc.org writes:
On 07/07/10 23:26, Greg Troxel wrote:
Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com writes:
I just need to clarify one thing that's not clear to me in re-reading
our thread from the other day: Is there a work-around for this?
My users are getting restless.
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Louis Guillaume wrote:
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) == [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix this?
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) == [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix this? I'll
try updating and see what happens.
On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) == [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
That last one seems to be my problem. Does the patch fix this?
On 7/7/10 4:45 PM, Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com wrote:
On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) == [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com writes:
On 6/10/10 11:27 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
(spamass-milter doesn't tell SA about auth) == [
rbl checks run against authenticated user's IP address
lack of ALL_TRUSTED for authenticated user's mail
]
That last one seems
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the messages
Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com writes:
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 03:08 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the
On 6/10/10 8:13 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
Louis Guillaumelo...@zabrico.com writes:
On 6/9/10 7:40 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being
Louis Guillaume lo...@zabrico.com writes:
I think what is supposed to happen is
spamass-milter gets milter macros
spamass-milter makes a synthetic Received: line that is *not* in the
message as received. This proxies for the Received: line that the
MTAe would add. The
your mail router is causing this behaviour.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/SA-checking-of-authenticated-users%27-messages-tp28826232p28826469.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the messages being
scored above the threshold. We
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 01:51 -0400, Louis Guillaume wrote:
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
You forgot to provide the reason (SA rules hit) for the
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 12:57 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de:
Anyway, if they are really properly authenticated, they should trigger
ALL_TRUSTED and hardly anything else. [...]
According to the wiki:
You only hit the ALL_TRUSTED when mail is from a trusted relay, surely
thats not going to happen if people are sending from a workstation
mail to the server doing the checking?
Yes, it does. The originating host (workstation) is trusted not to
send spam, because the submission is authenticated.
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
using authentication (not SASL auth tho), additionally the wiki
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule does not prevent mail
from being scanned by SA.
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
using authentication (not SASL auth tho), additionally the wiki
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:51 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
Quoting Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:30 +0100, a.sm...@ukgrid.net wrote:
On my system outbound mails are scanned, even though they are sent
using authentication (not SASL auth tho),
So? Yes, authentication and the ALL_TRUSTED rule does not prevent mail
from being scanned by SA. Clearly, because that is a SA rule...
What *does* prevent mail from being scanned by SA is *NOT* passing it to
SA in your MTA. I don't get your point.
Ok I just reread ur first post, I
On 6/9/10 2:40 AM, Daniel Lemke wrote:
Louis Guillaume-2 wrote:
2. When outgoing messages are checked, spamd tries to find a
user to run as using the recipient's address. The way this
is done is to use the user-portion of the recipient
address, which is absolutely insane!
Hi,
Recently I've had a lot of reports of returned mail from authenticated
users. The messages are being bounced on the way out.
I understand that SA checks outbound messages, but I have discovered two
things, one of them rather disturbing:
1. I cannot find a way to simply trust
24 matches
Mail list logo
