Am Dienstag, 14. Februar 2012, 08:50:17 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
Right now, I think the error is more basic because that domain name
doesn't resolve and that error says it couldn't even retrieve the
file to check the gpg signature.
ping sa.zmi.at
ping: unknown host sa.zmi.at
Thanks, but
Starting now, the ZMI_GERMAN ruleset is available via a new channel:
# sa-update --channel sa.zmi.at --nogpg
You need --nogpg for now as I have no info how to do a gpg setup with
it's own key infrastructure to be useful on several servers.
The direct download also changed it's location and is
On 02/15/2012 02:25 PM, Michael Monnerie wrote:
Starting now, the ZMI_GERMAN ruleset is available via a new channel:
# sa-update --channel sa.zmi.at --nogpg
You need --nogpg for now as I have no info how to do a gpg setup with
it's own key infrastructure to be useful on several servers.
The
On 2/15/2012 5:03 AM, Michael Monnerie wrote:
Thanks, but it must have been a delay in DNS propagation, as I could
already resolve that. # ping sa.zmi.at PING sa.zmi.at (212.69.164.60)
56(84) bytes of data.
I believe you've got something working only locally. Try it from
another network.
Am Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2012, 14:30:23 schrieb Axb:
sa.zmi.at has no A record
Fixed now - thanks.
--
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc
it-management Internet Services: Protéger
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: +43 660 / 415 6531
signature.asc
Am Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2012, 11:02:40 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
I believe you've got something working only locally. Try it from
another network. Perhaps a bind view?
Uh, thanks for your test. The glue record got lost on the zmi.at zone.
Now it's there.
--
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael
Am Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2012, 14:30:23 schrieb Axb:
sa.zmi.at has no A record
Fixed now - thanks.
--
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc
it-management Internet Services: Protéger
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: +43 660 / 415 6531
signature.asc
Description:
Hi,
I need to whitelist a sender, and I typically use whitelist_from_rcvd,
but it's not working in this case, and I suspect because rDNS fails:
Received: from ideascollide1.ablehost.com (unknown [208.81.177.83])
Is the next best approach to create a rule that deducts points or is
there
Den 2012-02-15 14:25, Michael Monnerie skrev:
Feedback as always appreciated at spam-ger...@zmi.at
domain not found from my ip, bogus acl needs updateing ?
temp added forwards in my own bind to at least can send you a email :-)
Q: Will some rules not fire if some condition exists based on other rules?
A: Correct. There are plenty of rules that build on other rules. We call
these
meta rules.
OK, but:
Q: Are there any default rules as supplied by sa-update that would
prevent SPF rules from firing?
Q: Any
Hello,
I have created some rules which I have found to be very effective so far at
identifying a certain type of spam that spamassassin otherwises cannot
detect.
Here are the rules:
# highly suspicious practices
rawbody LOCAL_UNNECESSARY_UNESCAPE
Hi,
I need to whitelist a sender, and I typically use whitelist_from_rcvd,
but it's not working in this case, and I suspect because rDNS fails:
Received: from ideascollide1.ablehost.com (unknown [208.81.177.83])
Is the next best approach to create a rule that deducts points or is
there
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 04:44:09PM -0500, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I need to whitelist a sender, and I typically use whitelist_from_rcvd,
but it's not working in this case, and I suspect because rDNS fails:
Received: from ideascollide1.ablehost.com (unknown [208.81.177.83])
Is the next best
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 07:49:15AM +0200, Henrik K wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 04:44:09PM -0500, Alex wrote:
Hi,
I need to whitelist a sender, and I typically use whitelist_from_rcvd,
but it's not working in this case, and I suspect because rDNS fails:
Received: from
14 matches
Mail list logo