Hi,
Thanks for your reply. I replied with the answer to my problems to
another post, It was caused by an odd USER_IN_WHITELIST definition in
the openprotect sa-update channel.
Removing there rules and setting up my own script sorted it out.
Cheers,
Mark
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 12:49:18PM -0400,
Mark Adams wrote:
> Ok, Fair enough.. I will change this listing to a whitelist_from_rcvd
> as I assume this list is farmed by spammers. (Should be using that
> always of course!)
>
> Header below.
>
> Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from hopnet.hopkins.co.uk ([10.0.0.23]
> hel
Hi, I had not done it with -D but have tried just now, with the same
result below
Content analysis details: (4.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
0.5 NO_RDNSSending M
Hi,
Nothing jumps out at me just looking at that. You said you ran --lint
with -D, did you run -t with -D?
Your Spam report is truncated so we can't see which rules are hit. When
you run spamassassin in test mode you should see a fuller report of the
rules that hit.
Mark Adams wrote:
Ok
I should also mention, we have a gateway mail server hence the extra
header. the spam scanning is done on the first header, so for proof this
is pasted below.
Regards,
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Mar 28 08:48:11 2007
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from [
Ok, Fair enough.. I will change this listing to a whitelist_from_rcvd as
I assume this list is farmed by spammers. (Should be using that always
of course!)
Header below.
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from hopnet.hopkins.co.uk ([10.0.0.23] helo=mail.hopkins.co.uk)
by hopkins.co.
Hi,
Because, more often than not, the reason that whitelisting is not
matching is that the headers you think are matching are not. Or there
is a type in the whitelist.cf file.
By not allowing us to see the entire header, you are making us guess.
Mark Adams wrote:
Thanks for you reply.
Why
Thanks for you reply.
Why would this make any difference?
"The headers checked for whitelist addresses are as follows: if
"Resent-From" is set, use that; otherwise check all addresses taken from
the following set of headers:
Envelope-Sender
Resent-Sender
X-Envelope-From
From
"
The only header
Hi,
I would think we need to see the FULL headers of this example email
before anyone can comment.
Mark Adams wrote:
Hi,
I have changed my reporting so it provides more information, and run
--test-mode with a message marked as spam, that should be whitelisted
whitelist.cf contents:
whiteli
Hi,
I have changed my reporting so it provides more information, and run
--test-mode with a message marked as spam, that should be whitelisted
whitelist.cf contents:
whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
when running spamassassin -D --lint, I see the following line
[18351] dbg: config: read file /e
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 04:40:27PM -0400, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> Mark Adams wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:06:51AM -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > > Is it scoring the whitelist lower or is it just not hitting?
> > >
> > > Can you post your whitelist rule and the headers from an example
> > >
> > Whitelist file is in /etc/spamassassin/ and is called whitelist.cf
> > entry;
> >
> > whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Is /etc/spamassassin where the rest of your site config is located? Typically
> it's /etc/mail/spamassassin, but "spamassassin -D --lint" would tell you.
>
Hi,
Yes /et
Mark Adams wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:06:51AM -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > Is it scoring the whitelist lower or is it just not hitting?
> >
> > Can you post your whitelist rule and the headers from an example
> > message?
>
> Hi, Apologies for delay I did not see this message. I am sti
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 05:56:31PM +, Mark Adams wrote:
> Whitelist file is in /etc/spamassassin/ and is called whitelist.cf
> entry;
>
> whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is /etc/spamassassin where the rest of your site config is located? Typically
it's /etc/mail/spamassassin, but "spamassas
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:06:51AM -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> Is it scoring the whitelist lower or is it just not hitting?
>
> Can you post your whitelist rule and the headers from an example
> message?
Hi, Apologies for delay I did not see this message. I am still having
issues with this so yo
Mark Adams wrote:
> Thanks, It is using both directories. It appears that it isn't
> subtracting the 50 points that it is supposed to when it is
> whitelisted? Do you know if this setting is changeable?
Is it scoring the whitelist lower or is it just not hitting?
Can you post your whitelist rule
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: /etc/spamassassin or /var/lib/spamassassin?
>
> Thanks, It is using both directories. It appears that it
> isn't subtracting the 50 points that it is supposed to when
> it is whi
Thanks, It is using both directories. It appears that it isn't
subtracting the 50 points that it is supposed to when it is whitelisted?
Do you know if this setting is changeable?
Regards,
Mark
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 09:15:17AM -0500, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> Mark Adams wrote:
> > Hi There,
> >
> >
Mark Adams wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> SA 3.1.7-1.
>
> I have setup openprotect http://saupdates.openprotect.com/
>
> Ever since I set it up my whitelists have not worked, these are
> located in /etc/spamassassin
>
> I thought that spamassassin checked both of these directories for
> rules, Am I cor
19 matches
Mail list logo
