As I was manually going through my spamfolder this evening I ran across a
message from my son that was tagged as spam. I have a manual whitelist .cf
file in /etc/mail/spamassassin and he is in the whitelist:
whitelist_from Brian Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The from message header shows I've
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:03:08PM -0500, Chris wrote:
whitelist_fromBrian Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whitelist_from (which you generally should avoid using) takes email addresses.
SA won't parse the above line to get the email address out.
The from message header shows I've entered the
Chris wrote:
Was it not checked because of the syntax of the whitelist_from?
Yes, it's invalid to put anything but an email address after
whitelist_from. The Brian Pollock part is unacceptable.
whitelist_fromBrian Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
vs
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 9:15 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
Chris wrote:
Was it not checked because of the syntax of the whitelist_from?
Yes, it's invalid to put anything but an email address after
whitelist_from. The Brian Pollock part is unacceptable.
whitelist_from Brian Pollock
Chris wrote:
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 9:15 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
Chris wrote:
Was it not checked because of the syntax of the whitelist_from?
Yes, it's invalid to put anything but an email address after
whitelist_from. The Brian Pollock part is unacceptable.
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 9:46 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
Chris wrote:
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 9:15 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
Chris wrote:
Was it not checked because of the syntax of the whitelist_from?
Yes, it's invalid to put anything but an email address after
whitelist_from. The
Chris wrote:
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 9:46 pm, Matt Kettler wrote:
Yes, whitelist_from_rcvd is a significantly better command to use. It
takes two parameters, the email address, and part of a RDNS lookup of a
host that delivered the mail.
ie:
whitelist_from_rcvd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
