Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Benny Pedersen
On 2021-04-08 18:25, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: Therefore it should work in 3.4.5 thanks. I wait until debian guys will push 3.4.5 to backports. will be 3.4.6, if debian is awake :-)

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Am 2021-04-08 17:46, schrieb Bill Cole: On 8 Apr 2021, at 6:25, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: and there is no undef_whitelist_auth, and the unwhitelist_auth does NOT work. It does work in 3.4.5, although if you're not there yet I'd advise waiting for 3.4.6. See https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssa

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Michael Storz
Am 2021-04-08 17:46, schrieb Bill Cole: On 8 Apr 2021, at 6:25, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: and there is no undef_whitelist_auth, and the unwhitelist_auth does NOT work. It does work in 3.4.5, although if you're not there yet I'd advise waiting for 3.4.6. See https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssa

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Michael Storz
Am 2021-04-08 17:26, schrieb Bill Cole: On 8 Apr 2021, at 8:04, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. It seems that abusers have worked around SA by using google domains and ad

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Bill Cole
On 8 Apr 2021, at 6:25, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: and there is no undef_whitelist_auth, and the unwhitelist_auth does NOT work. It does work in 3.4.5, although if you're not there yet I'd advise waiting for 3.4.6. See https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7809 -- Bill Col

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Bill Cole
On 8 Apr 2021, at 8:04, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. > > It seems that abusers have worked around SA by using google domains > and addresses for sendin

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >> I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. >> >> It seems that abusers have worked around SA by using google domains >> and addresses for sending spam from. On 04.04.21 14:19, RW wrote: >If google have been foolis

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-08 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 04 Apr 2021, at 05:21, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. On 04.04.21 06:35, @lbutlr wrote: The way that SA solves problems is by changing score values. The entire foundation of SA is "playing with scores". I disagree. The main work

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-06 Thread Kris Deugau
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I see they are evolving now, using google redirects to google links, further hiding. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://sites.google.com/ I've just created local rules to give a few points to several such constructs ranging from a low-scoring hit on just hav

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-06 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
An update to this: On 04.04.21 12:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I have received spam from: From: "Linda marry (via Google Drive)" it wasn't catches because of: 60_whitelist_auth.cf:def_welcomelist_auth *@google.com Now that users can abuse google.com domain, isn't it time to remove *@go

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread RW
On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 16:47:18 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >> On 04.04.21 13:09, Benny Pedersen wrote: > >> >change score to 7.5 > >> >change score to -3.5 > > >On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >> I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with sco

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 04.04.21 13:09, Benny Pedersen wrote: >change score to 7.5 >change score to -3.5 On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. It seems that abusers have worked around SA by using google domains and addresses for

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread RW
On Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:21:08 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 04.04.21 13:09, Benny Pedersen wrote: > >change score to 7.5 > >change score to -3.5 > > I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. > > It seems that abusers have worked around SA by using google domains > an

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread @lbutlr
On 04 Apr 2021, at 05:21, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 04.04.21 13:09, Benny Pedersen wrote: >> change score to 7.5 >> change score to -3.5 > > I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. The way that SA solves problems is by changing score values. The entire foundation of

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread Benny Pedersen
On 2021-04-04 13:21, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On 04.04.21 13:09, Benny Pedersen wrote: change score to 7.5 change score to -3.5 I prefer to solve problems instead of playing with scores. first rule hits is local rule with imho to low score for problems on spamassassin rules :-) meta

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 2021-04-04 12:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: I have received spam from: From: "Linda marry (via Google Drive)" it wasn't catches because of: 60_whitelist_auth.cf:def_welcomelist_auth *@google.com Now that users can abuse google.com domain, isn't it time to remove *@google.com from de

Re: google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread Benny Pedersen
On 2021-04-04 12:54, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: Hello, I have received spam from: From: "Linda marry (via Google Drive)" it wasn't catches because of: 60_whitelist_auth.cf:def_welcomelist_auth *@google.com Now that users can abuse google.com domain, isn't it time to remove *@google.com

google.com spam

2021-04-04 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
Hello, I have received spam from: From: "Linda marry (via Google Drive)" it wasn't catches because of: 60_whitelist_auth.cf:def_welcomelist_auth *@google.com Now that users can abuse google.com domain, isn't it time to remove *@google.com from def_whitelist_* ? the full header: X-Spam-Repo