> On Oct 2, 2018, at 13:49, Bill Cole
> wrote:
>
> On 2 Oct 2018, at 13:39, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
>>> On 2 Oct 2018, at 9:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
SIDE NOTE: I don't think there was any domain my message that was
blacklisted on URIBL - so I can't explain the "URIBL_BLOCKED",
On 2 Oct 2018, at 13:39, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2 Oct 2018, at 9:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
SIDE NOTE: I don't think there was any domain my message that was
blacklisted on URIBL - so I can't explain the "URIBL_BLOCKED", but
that only scored 0.001, so that was innocuous. I suspect that th
On Tue, 2 Oct 2018, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 2 Oct 2018, at 9:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
SIDE NOTE: I don't think there was any domain my message that was
blacklisted on URIBL - so I can't explain the "URIBL_BLOCKED", but that
only scored 0.001, so that was innocuous. I suspect that that ru
On 10/2/2018 9:59 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
can you post the headers?
or at least the Message-Id?
On 02.10.18 11:07, Rob McEwen wrote:
Here is the message as THEIR system saw it (with my client's info
masked) - but it looks like their Kerio (or the customer's email
client?) might be
On 2 Oct 2018, at 9:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
SIDE NOTE: I don't think there was any domain my message that was
blacklisted on URIBL - so I can't explain the "URIBL_BLOCKED", but
that only scored 0.001, so that was innocuous. I suspect that that
rule is malfunctioning on their end, and then they ch
Soweit ich das richtig verstanden habe, ist
http://www.dnsbl.manitu.net/
der „inhaltliche Nachfolger“ dieser Liste oder ?
Gruß
Sebastian
> Am 02.10.2018 um 14:37 schrieb Jakob Hirsch :
>
> Hi,
>
>> On 2018-09-30 18:06, Alex wrote:
>> 30-Sep-2018 12:03:24.249 query-errors: client @0x7ff3f01a
Bill,
Even though this part wasn't the main purpose of the thread, that is still very
helpful information. I will pass that along to my client so that they can
hopefully fix their configuration problem with regards to their usage of URIBL.
Thanks!
Rob McEwen
Sent from my Verizon Motorola Dro
On 2 Oct 2018, at 9:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
SIDE NOTE: I don't think there was any domain my message that was
blacklisted on URIBL - so I can't explain the "URIBL_BLOCKED", but
that only scored 0.001, so that was innocuous. I suspect that that
rule is malfunctioning on their end, and then they c
On 10/2/2018 9:59 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
can you post the headers?
or at least the Message-Id?
Matus... first, THANKS for your help with this!
Here is the message as THEIR system saw it (with my client's info
masked) - but it looks like their Kerio (or the customer's email
clien
Hi Daniele, You are correct. 3.4.2 does not support rule channels that
only use SHA1.
Please contact the other rule channels and tell them to add sha256. We
have moved away from SHA1. It should be trivial on their end to
generate a sha256sum.
Regards,
KAM
On 10/2/2018 10:00 AM, Daniele Duca w
Hello,
since updating to 3.4.2 I can't download rules from unofficial channels.
The problem is that in version 3.4.1 sa-update checks the hash of the
downloaded file using file.sha1 , while version 3.4.2 uses file.sha256
or file.sha512. See the relevant differences in the following sa-update
On 02.10.18 09:36, Rob McEwen wrote:
A client of mine wasn't getting my own hand-typed messages.
Unfortunately, they had their SA set to block on a score of 3 (which
is aggressive), and this particular rule hit plus a tiny bit of other
things put it above 3. But what is weird - is that it was h
A client of mine wasn't getting my own hand-typed messages.
Unfortunately, they had their SA set to block on a score of 3 (which is
aggressive), and this particular rule hit plus a tiny bit of other
things put it above 3. But what is weird - is that it was hitting on
hand typed-messages from me
Hi,
On 2018-09-30 18:06, Alex wrote:
> 30-Sep-2018 12:03:24.249 query-errors: client @0x7ff3f01a43d0
> 68.195.193.45#44607
> (230fe40b1401cf8c3fe2b8699cdb91bf.generic.ixhash.net): query failed
> (SERVFAIL) for 230fe40b1401cf8c3fe2b8699cdb91bf.generic.ixhash.net/IN/A
> at query.c:8580
According to
On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 12:20 +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> Are you talking about the .cf file and line that contains rule being
> warned about? I don't see how it could be done, looking at how the
> cf and stuff are processed.
>
Yes I was, but if it can';t be done, fair enough.
> I already patched the
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 09:44:41AM +0100, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 07:57 +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> > This is also nothing else than a warn, the rule works regardless.
> >
> That makes warnings like this somewhat useless because this makes
> locating them rather difficult. Is t
Il 30/09/2018 18:06, Alex ha scritto:
Hi all, I'm pretty sure this is a problem on their side, but can
anyone else confirm ixhash is having a problem? Anyone else using the
iXhash plugin? Their site http://www.ixhash.net/ also appears to be
down.
30-Sep-2018 12:03:24.249 query-errors: client @0x
On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 07:57 +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> This is also nothing else than a warn, the rule works regardless.
>
That makes warnings like this somewhat useless because this makes
locating them rather difficult. Is there any possibility of showing the
filename and line number in the --lint
18 matches
Mail list logo
