On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 16:22 +0100, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Not sure. I get this:
>
> http://pastebin.com/0U3WrgSS
>
The answer is at the botton:
40.152.71.64.list.dnswl.org. 43200 IN A 127.0.6.3
;; Received 61 bytes from 208.67.172.131#53(c.ns.dnswl.org) in 76 ms
So, according to c.ns.d
Den 2012-05-24 17:22, Jeremy Morton skrev:
Not sure. I get this:
http://pastebin.com/0U3WrgSS
this is working as designed, no refused or errors, if its not working
again then report it as so, with a +trace, report the last ns that fails
if it do
Just installed a new instance of spamassassin to offload some of the spam
processing from our main server. Occaisionally the following message will
appear and I'll have to restart spamd in order to get things going again.
syswrite() to parent failed: Broken pipe at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_per
Not sure. I get this:
http://pastebin.com/0U3WrgSS
--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
On 24/05/2012 16:12, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Den 2012-05-24 17:03, Jeremy Morton skrev:
Nope, but it doesn't actually give an answer section as part of its
output.
where it timeout or rejected ?, where in
Den 2012-05-24 17:03, Jeremy Morton skrev:
Nope, but it doesn't actually give an answer section as part of its
output.
where it timeout or rejected ?, where in the dns chain is it failing ?
Nope, but it doesn't actually give an answer section as part of its output.
--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
On 24/05/2012 16:06, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Den 2012-05-24 16:41, Jeremy Morton skrev:
I actually get:
Host 40.152.71.64.list.dnswl.org not found: 5(REFUSED)
dig +trace 40.152.71.
Den 2012-05-24 16:41, Jeremy Morton skrev:
I actually get:
Host 40.152.71.64.list.dnswl.org not found: 5(REFUSED)
dig +trace 40.152.71.64.list.dnswl.org
refused ?
Den 2012-05-24 16:06, Kevin A. McGrail skrev:
Normally, I blame a DNS server. See pages like this for more
information:
http://www.surbl.org/faqs#dnsproxy
surbl.org is one of the problematic dns servers for me, sent a email
about it to surbl, got nothing in return
Darxus, you wrote a go
On 24/05/2012 15:30, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 05/24, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Normally, I blame a DNS server. See pages like this for more information:
http://www.surbl.org/faqs#dnsproxy
Yup, that could do it. Icky.
Jeremy: You could manually check if you're getting the wrong DNS re
On 05/24, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Normally, I blame a DNS server. See pages like this for more information:
>
> http://www.surbl.org/faqs#dnsproxy
Yup, that could do it. Icky.
Jeremy: You could manually check if you're getting the wrong DNS results by
running:
$ host 26.13.94.59.list.dnsw
On 05/24, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> reject spf_softfail in mta, or report to http://www.dnswl.org/
SPF_SOFTFAIL kind of sucks:
http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?daterev=20120519-r1340375-n&rule=%2Fspf
MSECSSPAM% HAM% S/ORANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
0 3.2640 27.9430 0.105
On 5/24/2012 10:02 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 05/24, Jeremy Morton wrote:
-4.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at
http://www.dnswl.org/, medium
trust
[59.94.13.26 listed in list.dnswl.org]
I don't think this was ever actually listed by dnswl.org. I h
On 05/24, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> -4.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at
> http://www.dnswl.org/, medium
> trust
> [59.94.13.26 listed in list.dnswl.org]
I don't think this was ever actually listed by dnswl.org. I have
archives back to last June, which don't show it, a
On 05/24, corpus.defero wrote:
> I'm not 100% but isn't http://www.dnswl.org/ a 'DIY' whitelisting site
> that anyone can kind of abuse?
No.
I'm a (basically inactive) dnswl.org admin.
Anybody can request to be added to the list, but all changes get looked
over pretty thoroughly by a human, us
Den 2012-05-24 11:37, corpus.defero skrev:
I'm not 100% but isn't http://www.dnswl.org/ a 'DIY' whitelisting
site
that anyone can kind of abuse?
as long users can report spamming ips aswell as get listed for not
sending spam at all, its fine with me that some use it, for my self its
a way t
Den 2012-05-24 11:14, Jeremy Morton skrev:
Any ideas why the sender would be in the dnswl with medium trust? I
did recently change my machine's hostname to ip.game-point.net.
reject spf_softfail in mta, or report to http://www.dnswl.org/ (why did
thay list a dynamic ip ?)
if sender is legi
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 11:11 +0100, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Where would the rules for these blocklists be, so I can check my rules
> files to see whether they're there?
>
In later rulesets (forget when they added it) it looks something like
this:
ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DNSEval
header
Hello Jeremy,
Thursday, May 24, 2012, 11:11:22 AM, you wrote:
JM> Where would the rules for these blocklists be, so I can check my rules
JM> files to see whether they're there?
Mine are in /var/lib/spamassassin/3.003002/updates_spamassassin_org
--
Best regards,
Niamh
Where would the rules for these blocklists be, so I can check my rules
files to see whether they're there?
--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
On 24/05/2012 11:09, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Jeremy,
Thursday, May 24, 2012, 10:53:33 AM, you wrote:
JM> Interesting that they didn't show up i
Hello Jeremy,
Thursday, May 24, 2012, 10:53:33 AM, you wrote:
JM> Interesting that they didn't show up in my SpamAssassin headers; do you
JM> think I need to add some extra rules for these blocklists?
Maybe the listings came after you got your email?
--
Best regards,
Niamh
On 24/05/2012 10:37, corpus.defero wrote:
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 10:14 +0100, Jeremy Morton wrote:
I've gotten a lot of false positives coming into my inbox lately, and
the principle reason for most of them seems to be that they are matching
the following rule:
-4.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL:
On 24/05/2012 10:37, corpus.defero wrote:
But that's just my default settings on every instance of SA that I work
on. Sometimes I add points for Return Path as it seems to help BLOCK
spam rather than pass ham - but that's a can of worms and a different
subject.
Ham, spam, and worms. Sounds lik
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 10:14 +0100, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> I've gotten a lot of false positives coming into my inbox lately, and
> the principle reason for most of them seems to be that they are matching
> the following rule:
> -4.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org
- Original Message -
> From: "Jeremy Morton"
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:14:11 AM
> Subject: Suddenly getting lots of false positives.
>
> I've gotten a lot of false positives coming into my inbox lately, and
> the principle reason for most of t
Hello Jeremy,
Thursday, May 24, 2012, 10:14:11 AM, you wrote:
JM> [59.94.13.26 listed in list.dnswl.org]
Doesn't seem to be listed any more-
http://dnswl.org/s?s=59.94.13.26
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpUnhy0X1zUq.pgp
Description: PGP sign
25 matches
Mail list logo
