Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread Tom Hendrikx
Hi, Note that on at least Ubuntu from some time ago, unbound was automatically configured to take the dns servers that were received from an upstream server during DHCP, and configure those as forwarders. Can you show us output of: unbound-control list_forwards Kind regards, Tom On 13-1

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread John Hardin
I just want to call this out as the critical detail in all the back-and-forth: The main thing with setting up a DNS server for DNSBL lookups is not "caching", it is "non-forwarding". Take a look at your unbound settings and make sure it is doing all of the lookups itself and not forwarding

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread David Jones
On 10/13/2017 08:45 AM, AJ Weber wrote: On 10/13/2017 9:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: next time make a notice in your first post that you don#t have a serious mailserver but "maybe because I have a DHCP address from a major ISP and that's a problem" OK, I can do that, but there isn't anything i

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread Bowie Bailey
On 10/13/2017 9:45 AM, AJ Weber wrote: On 10/13/2017 9:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: next time make a notice in your first post that you don#t have a serious mailserver but "maybe because I have a DHCP address from a major ISP and that's a problem" OK, I can do that, but there isn't anything in

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread AJ Weber
On 10/13/2017 9:23 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: next time make a notice in your first post that you don#t have a serious mailserver but "maybe because I have a DHCP address from a major ISP and that's a problem" OK, I can do that, but there isn't anything in the troubleshooting for DNSBL regardin

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread AJ Weber
I put the following in my local.cf.  This does not work? dns_available yes # - REDIRECT DNS LOOKUPS TO LOCAL "unbound" service to avoid RBL bans dns_server 127.0.0.1 On 10/13/2017 8:48 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.10.2017 um 14:40 schrieb AJ Weber: I guess this qualifies as a newbie quest

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread AJ Weber
On 10/13/2017 8:57 AM, David Jones wrote: On 10/13/2017 07:47 AM, Markus Clardy wrote: URIBL_BLOCKED is in reference to multi.uribl.com . --   - Markus To disable queries to multi.uribl.com, put this in your local.cf or equivalent in /etc/mail/spamassassin: score UR

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread David Jones
On 10/13/2017 08:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.10.2017 um 14:57 schrieb David Jones: To disable queries to multi.uribl.com, put this in your local.cf or equivalent in /etc/mail/spamassassin: score URIBL_BLACK 0 score URIBL_GREY 0 score URIBL_RED 0 Based on my mail flow and other RBLs, I

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread David Jones
On 10/13/2017 07:47 AM, Markus Clardy wrote: URIBL_BLOCKED is in reference to multi.uribl.com . On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:40 PM, AJ Weber > wrote: I guess this qualifies as a newbie question...I've been running SA for a while, but have

Re: URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread Markus Clardy
URIBL_BLOCKED is in reference to multi.uribl.com. On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:40 PM, AJ Weber wrote: > I guess this qualifies as a newbie question...I've been running SA for a > while, but haven't really dug into some of the workings... > > I occasionally see the URIBL_BLOCKED notice in some of my

URIBL_BLOCKED - which one?

2017-10-13 Thread AJ Weber
I guess this qualifies as a newbie question...I've been running SA for a while, but haven't really dug into some of the workings... I occasionally see the URIBL_BLOCKED notice in some of my spam results.  I read the related web page, and started using unbound as a local DNS, but I'm still seei

Re: improving detection to cloudmark-like levels?

2017-10-13 Thread David Jones
On 10/13/2017 04:45 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote: I don't use Kam.cf as it is very prone to false positives and way too aggressively scored by default. I'm pretty happy with my current setup with 3.4.1 though. If you are happy with your SA accuracy, don't change a thing. :) H

Re: improving detection to cloudmark-like levels?

2017-10-13 Thread Jari Fredriksson
I don't use Kam.cf as it is very prone to false positives and way too aggressively scored by default. I'm pretty happy with my current setup with 3.4.1 though. 12. lokakuuta 2017 17.07.41 GMT+03:00 "Kevin A. McGrail" kirjoitti: >On 10/12/2017 9:25 AM, AJ Weber wrote: >> I'm open to new rules,