Am 05.01.2015 um 22:13 schrieb John Hardin:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning toothpick syndrome.
For example:
m#http://match/this/url/#
Ouch. # won't work for that
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning toothpick syndrome.
For example:
m#http://match/this/url/#
Ouch. # won't work for that (in SA
Am 05.01.2015 um 23:07 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 22:58:
well, the sender don't publish SPF at all
helo is not a spf policy, its a spf helo policy, confused ?, me 2 :=)
without a SPF record a domain don't have anything but SPF_NONE
dig duggi.junc.org txt
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
the above is 2 diff tests
i know that by myself *but* if the sending domain does not publish
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
the above is 2 diff tests
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:57 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning toothpick syndrome.
For example:
Am 05.01.2015 um 23:14 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 1/5/2015 5:02 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:57 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
For example:
m#http://match/this/url/#
Ouch. # won't work for that (in SA at least) as it comments out the
rest of
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 23:13:
Am 05.01.2015 um 23:07 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
@domaintechnik.at don't publish SPF regardless over what server it was
sent and so i see no valid reason for a positive score of outgoing
mails over host5.ssl-gesichert.at[213.145.228.32]
helo is mta,
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 13:13 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
Ouch. # won't work for that (in SA at least) as it comments out the rest
of the RE.
But at least you can escape the # if you need it in a regex.
Martin
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
the above is 2 diff tests
i know that by myself *but* if the sending domain does not publish any
SPF policy then there should be no positive score for
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 22:58:
well, the sender don't publish SPF at all
helo is not a spf policy, its a spf helo policy, confused ?, me 2 :=)
dig duggi.junc.org txt
dig junc.org txt
see not one spf txt, but 2
hope that covers it for others aswell
On 1/5/2015 5:02 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:57 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning
without a SPF record a domain don't have anything but SPF_NONE
Doesn't that depend on the HELO of the server? If they HELO'd with another name
which does have a record it would explain it.
(pure speculation, in your posts I didn't see where they HELO'd with, or I have
missed it).
Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
the above is 2 diff tests
i know that by myself *but* if the
Am 06.01.2015 um 02:38 schrieb Derek Diget:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 at 00:46 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
=Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW:
= On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
= Reindl Harald wrote:
= Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
= Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
=
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.01.2015 um 02:27 schrieb John Hardin:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
it's a matter of technical correctness
no SPF on the envelope domain, no SPF
* OK:SPF_PASS
* OK:SPF_PASS,SPF_HELO_PASS
* OK:SPF_NONE
*
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 01:31:
my whole point is when the sending domain don't have a SPF record and
so SPF_NONE correctly hits all meta-rules in context of SPF should
not fire up at all
its irrelevant since helo testing and envelope from is diffrence tests
there is no dependice
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 23:13:15 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
so what - the domain and the subdomain publish SPF
as example whoe...@domaintechnik.at don't and hence there is no
justification for hit score SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001
Ah, when I previously pointed out that it didn't have a positive
Am 06.01.2015 um 00:10 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 23:13:
Am 05.01.2015 um 23:07 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
@domaintechnik.at don't publish SPF regardless over what server it was
sent and so i see no valid reason for a positive score of outgoing
mails over
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 00:41:
Benny i got more then you imagine after maintain some hundret domains
for over a decade from registry level over DNS to email and
webservices, please get out of my sight
fair, helo is more important in spf mta checkers then in sa spf checkers
but the
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 00:46:18 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning toothpick syndrome.
For example:
Am 06.01.2015 um 02:27 schrieb John Hardin:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
it's a matter of technical correctness
no SPF on the envelope domain, no SPF
* OK:SPF_PASS
* OK:SPF_PASS,SPF_HELO_PASS
* OK:SPF_NONE
* WRONG: SPF_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS
one can argue about the
Am 06.01.2015 um 03:00 schrieb John Hardin:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.01.2015 um 02:27 schrieb John Hardin:
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
it's a matter of technical correctness
no SPF on the envelope domain, no SPF
* OK:SPF_PASS
* OK:
Am 06.01.2015 um 01:27 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 00:41:
Benny i got more then you imagine after maintain some hundret domains
for over a decade from registry level over DNS to email and
webservices, please get out of my sight
fair, helo is more important in
Am 06.01.2015 um 01:32 schrieb RW:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 00:46:18 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
how can
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Reindl Harald wrote:
it's a matter of technical correctness
no SPF on the envelope domain, no SPF
* OK:SPF_PASS
* OK:SPF_PASS,SPF_HELO_PASS
* OK:SPF_NONE
* WRONG: SPF_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS
one can argue about the severity but the correctness is out of question
On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 at 00:46 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
=Am 06.01.2015 um 00:06 schrieb RW:
= On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:58:55 +0100
= Reindl Harald wrote:
= Am 05.01.2015 um 22:54 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
= Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-05 18:52:
=how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
=
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 01:55:
* OK:SPF_PASS
* OK:SPF_PASS,SPF_HELO_PASS
meta SPF_FULL_PASS (SPF_PASS SPF_HELO_PASS)
score as you like
* OK:SPF_NONE
* WRONG: SPF_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS
meta SPF_FULL_FAIL (!SPF_PASS SPF_HELO_PASS)
score as you like
one can argue
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 02:45:
i only say there can not be any sort of SPF PASS if the sending domain
don't have any SPF record at all - it's just wrong
you dont get it :(
sending domain is not in helo !
giving up :(
Am 06.01.2015 um 03:25 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
Reindl Harald skrev den 2015-01-06 02:45:
i only say there can not be any sort of SPF PASS if the sending domain
don't have any SPF record at all - it's just wrong
you dont get it :(
sending domain is not in helo !
giving up :(
you don't
--As of January 5, 2015 4:38:03 PM -0800, John Hardin is alleged to have
said:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 1/5/2015 4:13 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the
On 2015-01-05 18:34, Reindl Harald wrote:
if the envelope-domain has no SPF published and want to verify
anything in context of HELO then you can check:
* does the HELO hostname exist at all
* does the IP match in both directions
but you are far away from a SPF_HELO_PASS in context of the
how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 1/4/2015 5:42 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.01.2015 um 06:43 schrieb Bob Proulx:
The additional issue was that you were referencing PHP documentation.
Might as well have been referencing Lisp documentation for all of the
relevance it had. That was the point I saw being addressed at that
On Jan 5, 2015 at 18:52 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
=how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
Just by going off the names...
The domain presented in the HELO (RFC5321.HELO) command
passed the SPF check_host() test while the domain used in the mail from
(RFC5321.MailFrom) command didn't have
Am 05.01.2015 um 19:14 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 1/4/2015 5:42 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.01.2015 um 06:43 schrieb Bob Proulx:
The additional issue was that you were referencing PHP documentation.
Might as well have been referencing Lisp documentation for all of the
relevance it had. That
Am 05.01.2015 um 19:22 schrieb Derek Diget:
On Jan 5, 2015 at 18:52 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
=how can SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE fire both?
Just by going off the names...
The domain presented in the HELO (RFC5321.HELO) command
passed the SPF check_host() test while the domain used in the mail
Anybody can help with this? I still cannot find some helpful
information, thanks.
Dne 10.12.2014 v 14:52 Christian Grunfeld napsal(a):
when you run bayes in SQL and does sa-learn --username it will not try
to setuid to that user (in a real system user scenario it will fail
for non existent
On 1/4/2015 10:40 PM, J.J. Day wrote:
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the link. It's a starting point. As far as the two
functions are concerned, I was just hoping to short cut the process of
finding them.
Actually, I am a pretty good programmer in half a dozen languages -
it's just that I have never
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Bowie Bailey wrote:
You can avoid having to escape the slash (/) by using a different
separator for the regex. This can avoid leaning toothpick syndrome.
For example:
m#http://match/this/url/#
Ouch. # won't work for that (in SA at least) as it comments out the rest
41 matches
Mail list logo
