> On Jan 8, 2023, at 10:35 PM, Henrik K wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 04:23:11PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
>> What did you end up with?
>>
>> I have a bunch of zero rules for these yet still keep getting the
>> "administrative notice" from sbl/zen.
>>
>> The fact that those guys
> On Jan 8, 2023, at 10:44 PM, joe a wrote:
>
> On 1/8/2023 4:23 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
>> What did you end up with?
>
> score RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS 0
>
> I am not certain if that stops the test or simply reporting of the message.
> Looks like I will need to do some packet
On 1/8/2023 10:35 PM, Henrik K wrote:
On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 04:23:11PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
. . .
# remove spamhaus tests,. . .
score RCVD_IN_SBL 0
score RCVD_IN_XBL 0
score RCVD_IN_PBL 0
score URIBL_SBL 0
score URIBL_CSS 0
score URIBL_SBL_A 0. . .
Much easier and reliable way:
On 1/8/2023 4:38 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
joe a skrev den 2023-01-08 21:50:
SA version 3.4.5
Gears are clashing, clutch is slipping, among other things.
Trying to exclude certain checks, via spamhouse services "by the book"
what book ?
The good one? Several places. Most looked like cut
On 1/8/2023 4:23 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
What did you end up with?
score RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS 0
I am not certain if that stops the test or simply reporting of the
message. Looks like I will need to do some packet capture after all.
I have a bunch of zero rules for these yet
On 1/8/2023 4:00 PM, joe a wrote:
On 1/8/2023 3:50 PM, joe a wrote:
SA version 3.4.5
Gears are clashing, clutch is slipping, among other things.
Trying to exclude certain checks, via spamhouse services "by the book"
When placing these values in local.cf:
RCVD_IN_ZEN 0
RCVD_IN_XBL 0
On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 04:23:11PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> What did you end up with?
>
> I have a bunch of zero rules for these yet still keep getting the
> "administrative notice" from sbl/zen.
>
> The fact that those guys don't just send out a "yes, this is on by default in
>
Hello list,
After an upgrade to SA-4.0.0 I decided to give TxRep a try after using
AWL since it was introduced.
I set up TxRep accordingly to SA’s documentation with a mysql-5.7.40
server, give it a first try by sending an email to the box where SA is
running and saw TxRep just has recorded
Charles Sprickman skrev den 2023-01-08 22:23:
What did you end up with?
I have a bunch of zero rules for these yet still keep getting the
"administrative notice" from sbl/zen.
The fact that those guys don't just send out a "yes, this is on by
default in spamassassin, here is copy pasta to turn
joe a skrev den 2023-01-08 21:50:
SA version 3.4.5
Gears are clashing, clutch is slipping, among other things.
Trying to exclude certain checks, via spamhouse services "by the book"
what book ?
When placing these values in local.cf:
RCVD_IN_ZEN 0
RCVD_IN_XBL 0
RCVD_IN_PBL 0
"spamassassin
What did you end up with?
I have a bunch of zero rules for these yet still keep getting the
"administrative notice" from sbl/zen.
The fact that those guys don't just send out a "yes, this is on by default in
spamassassin, here is copy pasta to turn us off" email bugs me.
I've grown to this
On 1/8/2023 3:50 PM, joe a wrote:
SA version 3.4.5
Gears are clashing, clutch is slipping, among other things.
Trying to exclude certain checks, via spamhouse services "by the book"
When placing these values in local.cf:
RCVD_IN_ZEN 0
RCVD_IN_XBL 0
RCVD_IN_PBL 0
"spamassassin --lint"
SA version 3.4.5
Gears are clashing, clutch is slipping, among other things.
Trying to exclude certain checks, via spamhouse services "by the book"
When placing these values in local.cf:
RCVD_IN_ZEN 0
RCVD_IN_XBL 0
RCVD_IN_PBL 0
"spamassassin --lint" complains. Yet SA starts without
On 1/8/2023 2:08 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On 07.01.23 14:06, joe a wrote:
Pretty sure. Or, I was. Ran various tests with unbound running
and
not running confirmed it was working, at least providing a
response.
Thats pretty simple to check, provided you've got Wireshark installed:
Fire it
> > On 07.01.23 14:06, joe a wrote:
> > > Pretty sure. Or, I was. Ran various tests with unbound running
> > > and
> > > not running confirmed it was working, at least providing a
> > > response.
> >
Thats pretty simple to check, provided you've got Wireshark installed:
Fire it up and tell it
On 2023-01-06 at 17:23:50 UTC-0500 (Fri, 6 Jan 2023 16:23:50 -0600)
Brian Conry
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
First things first:
* SpamAssassin version: 3.4.2
* Debian 10
I don't know what the Debian versioning status is, but that is a very
old and very likely broken SA if it has not had
On 1/8/2023 12:36 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 07.01.23 12:03, joe a wrote:
Thanks. I think I actually got unbound working but still was
getting URIBL rejects from spamhaus.
On 1/7/2023 1:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
- do you actually use that unbound server? is 127.0.0.1 in
On 07.01.23 12:03, joe a wrote:
Thanks. I think I actually got unbound working but still was
getting URIBL rejects from spamhaus.
On 1/7/2023 1:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
- do you actually use that unbound server? is 127.0.0.1 in
/etc/resolv.conf?
On 07.01.23 14:06, joe a wrote:
On 1/8/2023 12:57 AM, Brian Conry wrote:
...
Third, to expand on something I alluded to briefly, the emails in
question are generated by a security appliance on our customer's
network, in accordance with their security policy and posture. The
warnings we're getting when our mail server
On 8/1/23 13:57, Brian Conry wrote:
Hello again,
I'm replying to my own message because I don't want to single out
anyone who has already replied. There was value in each of your
responses.
This is going to be a long email, and for that you have my apologies,
but I can't think of any way
20 matches
Mail list logo
