> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 11:03 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SA 3.0 CVS and SURBL
> 
> At 01:24 PM 6/3/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >I did add:
> >score URIBL_SC_SURBL    4.0
> >
> >to /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
> >
> >I am asking because I sent a test message with this test url 
> in the body:
> >
> >http://surbl-org-permanent-test-point.com.sc.surbl.org
> >
> >and I do not see it being scored at all.
> 
> Strange.. I've got a working install of SURBL using the 
> Mail::SpamCopURI module on 2.63, and your message did not 
> trigger SURBL. I wonder if the dashes are confusing the URI decoding?
> 
> Perhaps
> http://test.surbl.org.sc.surbl.org
> 
> would work better? 
> 

I tried that.  Same result.
I wonder whether SA is even contacting the list.

Looking at /var/log/maillog,  I do see SURBL is being referred to:

Jun  3 14:12:12 sh-umail9 spamd[2210]: result: Y 28 -
BAYES_99,BIZ_TLD,DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24,DCC_CHECK,FORGED_OUTLOOK_TAGS,FORGED_R
CVD_HELO,HTML_60_70,HTML_BACKHAIR_4,HTML_BADTAG_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_NONE
LEMENT_60_70,HTML_OBFUSCATE_30_40,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,MIME_HTML_NO_CHARSET
,MIME_HTML_ONLY,RATWARE_ZERO_TZ,SUBJ_HAS_SPACES,URIBL_BE_SURBL,URIBL_SC_SURB
L,URIBL_WS_SURBL
scantime=3.7,size=1581,mid=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,baye
s=1,autolearn=spam

So it seems to me that this particular message (not the test I sent) is
indeed being caught by all 3 lists of SURBL.  Is that the correct
interpretation ?

Lu

Reply via email to