rOn Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Declan Moriarty wrote: > > > > > > > Content analysis details: (6.0 points, 5.0 required) > > > > pts rule name description > > ---- ---------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------- > > 3.0 PLING_QUERY Subject has exclamation mark and question mark > > 3.0 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO > > > > > Your mail landed in the spam. I think I had the pling_query, but you > have the FORGED_RCVD_HELO. It's this line > > Received: from ppgpenguin.kenmoffat.uklinux.net > (spc2-brig1-3-0-cust232.asfd.broadband.ntl.com [82.1.142.232]) > by smtp.linuxfromscratch.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F73825A0 > > It's seen as forged because of the 2 domain names on the same line for > the same box. As one who has been there, the ntl domain is pretty > useless to you usually. It's not registered anywhere. > >
Mistaken analysis. The ntl address is where it's actually coming from, I just happen to call it by a uklinux.net name because that was where it used to come from before broadband, and kenmoffat.uklinux.net should still be reachable (I pay for that to save resubscribing everything). BTW, if we're getting into detail about headers, I much prefer your declan.moriarty@ address to your junk_mail@ because procmail identifies any mail@ as an admin address. I attempt to filter bounces (often for forged senders) to a different mailbox so that on a bad day I can defer looking at the 300 bounced messages from spam|phishing|viruses. This means I ususally don't look at your messages to blfs-support until I notice that somebody has replied to them, or until I have time to look at my 'queries' mbox. But that is my problem, and the results of your spam filters are your problem if they do 101% of what you intended :) Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
