On Thursday 02 June 2016 at 13:16:57, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 12:28 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > Therefore I agree that there could be better way of noticing admins
> > > of a [URIBL_BLOCKED] issue.
>
> create and install a logwatch service that scans /var/log/maillog
> for lines containing "URIBL_BLOCKED" - this involves a two line config
> file and a scanner (a few lines of Perl).
The problem I see with this, though, is that you have to know that
URIBL_BLOCKED is something sinister, and needs to be flagged as a problem, to
bother doing this.
It's probably less effort to actually set up a recursive local name server, so
anyone who knows about URIBL_BLOCKED will simply do this instead.
Antony.
--
The next sentence is untrue.
The previous sentence is also not true.
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.
