On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:37:56PM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> > Could it be that the combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com
> > chokes under the load of a GA/perceptron run and stops responding?
> > I've seen it unresponsive yesterday for about half an hour.
>
> odd. I guess that's a possibil
Mark Martinec writes:
> Rocco,
>
> > > > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on
> > > I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
> >
> > I don't understand.. maybe my remark is wrong,
> > but I [do] get this score for the rules above
>
> I said '3.2.0-rc1
Rocco,
> > > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on
> > I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
>
> I don't understand.. maybe my remark is wrong,
> but I [do] get this score for the rules above
I said '3.2.0-rc1', didn't I?
Btw, I got 1800 messages hi
Hi,
Rocco Scappatura wrote:
There is another discussion on this list about rules that
catch these sorts of messages. Check that out for ideas.
For what it is worth these are the rules I get:
Content analysis details: (10.5 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---
> > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on
> bogons IP block
> > [102.176.29.76 listed in
> > combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com]
>
> I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
> (unlike RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID and RCVD_IN_WHOIS_HIJACKED,
>
> There is another discussion on this list about rules that
> catch these sorts of messages. Check that out for ideas.
>
> For what it is worth these are the rules I get:
>
> Content analysis details: (10.5 points, 5.0 required)
>
> pts rule name description
> ---
Mark Martinec writes:
> > > > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois:
> > > > sender on bogons IP block [102.176.29.76 listed in
> > > > combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com]
> > > I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
> > > (unlike RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID a
> > > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois:
> > > sender on bogons IP block [102.176.29.76 listed in
> > > combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com]
> > I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
> > (unlike RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID and RCVD_IN_WHOIS_HIJACKED...
>
>
Mark Martinec writes:
> > 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on bogons IP block
> > [102.176.29.76 listed in combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com]
>
> I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
> (unlike RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID and RCVD_IN_WHOI
> 2.4 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on bogons IP block
> [102.176.29.76 listed in combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com]
I wonder why score for RCVD_IN_WHOIS_BOGONS is 0 in 3.2.0-rc1 ?
(unlike RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID and RCVD_IN_WHOIS_HIJACKED, which are nonzero)
r
> Before anyone can you give you a hint on how to block the
> messages, we would need to see what the messages are.
>
> Same form as before, save the message (with full headers) and
> place it somewhere where we can download it.
http://www.rocsca.it/INBOX
rocsca
Hi,
Rocco Scappatura wrote:
Before anyone can you give you a hint on how to block the
messages, we would need to see what the messages are.
Same form as before, save the message (with full headers) and
place it somewhere where we can download it.
http://www.rocsca.it/INBOX
There is anothe
If you wish to reject at MTA level then please read
http://www.postfix.org/uce.html under the section "Client hostname/address
restrictions" as you are able to specify a list of RBLs.
Regards,
UxBoD
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:20:16 +0200, "Rocco Scappatura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> What MTA
> What MTA are you using ?
Postfix+MySQL+Amavisd-new
rocsca
Hi Rocco,
Rocco Scappatura wrote:
Since some day, It's increased the number of spams which SA doesn't
block.
Every time I'm going to analyse the message:
1) Save the message in mbox format 'message.mbox'
2) su - amavis -c "spamassassin -t < message.mbox"
And I get that the score is greater th
What MTA are you using ?
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:06:55 +0200, "Rocco Scappatura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Since some day, It's increased the number of spams which SA doesn't
> block.
>
> Every time I'm going to analyse the message:
>
> 1) Save the message in mbox format 'message.mbox'
> 2) s
Since some day, It's increased the number of spams which SA doesn't
block.
Every time I'm going to analyse the message:
1) Save the message in mbox format 'message.mbox'
2) su - amavis -c "spamassassin -t < message.mbox"
And I get that the score is greater the 5.0 and often I get:
1.6 RCVD_IN_
17 matches
Mail list logo
